Thursday, July 19, 2018



After Alex Dominguez beat Rene Oliviera I posted a nice gracious story.  I de facto recognized Alex as our new State Rep because as the system works if he wanted to be part of the 2019 session he had to get to work now.  But his paid drunk responded to me being nice with a vile defamatory attack.

I stand by every word I wrote yesterday about the hearing and in particular Judge Sorola's judicial temperament.  This is very important in choosing a new judge.  But actual knowledge of the law and the capacity to engage in critical thinking is essentially more important and Sorola has neither.

I tried to report in a fair and balanced way.  I actually put a lot of the blame on the lawyers.  It was straight up and down reporting.  The mistakes of the lawyers had to be pointed out.

So today now that Sorola's paid hack has gone on the attack again with actual defamation per se against me while being paid by both Sorola and Mike Hernandez, I will take the story in that direction.

Sorola showed extreme bias for Mike Hernandez's side.  He looked Barton straight in the face when his phone rang and he answered it in the courtroom.  Barton then left the courtroom.  Any other judge would have ordered Barton's phone confiscated.  Twice Barton had to leave to control some out of control child in the hall making a ton of noise disrupting the proceedings.  In both cases Sorola did nothing.

There is no picture taking without the judge's permission.  The picture Montoya posted was me asking Ben Neece if it was okay if I go up to Nurith Galonsky to apologize for something.  She was so lady like she blew me away.  And I will tell you if she were a trial lawyer, the men in this town would be shitting bricks.  She is brilliant and incredibly poised as a witness and a lawyer.

Montoya wants you to believe I was somehow part of Nurith Galonsky's legal team.  Absolutely false and in fact my posts when compared to the hearing prove anything I had to say was ignored.  I make money as a contract paralegal so his claims are defamation per se.

On the second TOMA violation.

" It will be a  tactical error of significant magnitude if Nurith's lawyers do not amend the lawsuit to include the Oliviera TOMA violation.  "

Well they did not amend the lawsuit and it did prove to be a tactical error of significant magnitude.

Judge Sorola would not let them argue it.  David Willis did use my language of pattern and practice to justify considering the issue.  But Judge Sorola refused to follow the law on the issue.  Anything which helps the court understand intent is admissible and Judge Sorola  threw well established law out the window by saying no he would not hear any evidence on the issue or any evidence which shows pattern and practice.  This never would have happened with a competent judge.

Futher he had no authority to allow Oliviera to appear until he first heard the Motion for Oliviera to show authority.  Sorola is either totally devoid of any knowledge of the law or just ignored it to please Mike Hernandez who he fears.

Because of Montoya's lie it is defamation per se, Sorola is now part of the defamation suit coming.   I am filing on Mike Hernandez for the continuing tort of defamation and false light and because Mary Esther and Louis Sorola are two of the people who pay Montoya to lie and defame people they are now in the lawsuit. By next week they will have my demand letter on the defamation per se and my proof they pay Montoya.


It is basic law that a court must  compare similar laws to discern their intent.  It informs the court of the law making authority's intent.

When David Willis tried to explain the court needed to do this Judge Sorola said no and stopped him.  Judge Sorola either had no knowledge of this basic rule, or he kept it out because based on the rules of statutory interpretation it proved there is no position of Executive Director at the GBIC.

David Willis did a great job on the evidence by forcing Cesar de Leon to read into the record the by-law which puts all of the responsibility of an executive director on him.  

The fact the city commission made a provision for an Executive Director at the BEDC, but not the GBIC means by law the city commission did not intend for there to be an Executive Director for the GBIC.  Remember historically all of this was handled by the BEDC before the split.  Cesar de Leon admitted he helped to write the new by-laws.  If he and the others wanted to make for an Executive Director they could have.  But they chose not to.  They knew it was in the BEDC by-laws and chose to not add them to the GBIC by-laws.

This is statutory interpretation 101.  Judge Sorola either does not know the law or intentionally banned the testimony on the issue because he knew it would not help Mike Hernandez's cabal of whores.

This is all second nature to the court of appeals which is why I have suggested they immediately, like today or tomorrow, file a stay with Judge Ben Ureste, and if he denies it immediately file for the mandamus where they will immediate stop the hiring of Mario Lozoya.

Oliviera's argument that the law should be ignored because if a temporary injunction were issued the city and GBIC could be sued by Mario Lozoya is just plain stupid and weak.  There is enough evidence of Mario's dirty hands to keep him from getting a nickel.  I am told that while the TRO was in place they have eye witnesses of Mario and Carlos Marin meeting.  Nurith Galonsky swore there are emails of Mario Lozoya doing business as the Executive Director while the TRO was in place.  But they chose not to produce the emails so Judge Sorola would not allow for the evidence.  Also why did they not file a motion for contempt on Mario Lozoya.

Again further proof I was not involved in advising Galonsky's counsel because my advice as posted in the BV was clearly ignored and they ended up looking stupid.

"Also of note Nurith's attorneys are claiming based on information and belief Mario Lozoya has  repeatedly violated the TRO and is conducting business as the GBIC Executive Director.  This is a very serious allegation.  They better have witnesses with solid proof.  If they do not the allegation will make them look bad."

She testified under oath the evidence was in the form of emails to the staff.  Why were they not produced in court?  And yes they looked really bad for this mistake and Judge Sorola kept out the testimony as hearsay.  But when the same problem came up with Cesar de Leon Judge Sorola allowed in the testimony.

At this point I expect this to go nowhere. It is over unless the city steps in. By tomorrow they can have an application for stay before the court of appeals. The basic laws which proves this case is basic to them. The stay will issue, but Nurith Galonsky does not have the lawyers who can do his.  The issues are narrow.  There is no need for a "War an Peace" novel approach.

Cesar de Leon swore under oath that he signed the contract right after Mario Lozoya.  This contradicted the distraction Oliviera tried to create that he signed it after the vote.  Even then Cesar admitted one way or the other he signed the contract before the meeting to approve the hire of Mario Lozoya.  He admitted he hired Oliviera before the meeting to hire counsel.  This is not hard.  Judge Sorola showed his bias by keeping out Nurith's testimony about Mario violating the TRO, but had no problem with Cesar de Leon using hearsay testimony as to what was said in the Executive Session when in fact there are minutes reduced to writing which he failed to produce.

There needs to be a full criminal investigation to determined if Sorola was threatened by outside parties that Montoya would take him down if he did not do Mike Hernandez's bidding.  Sorola and Mike both pay Montoya to defame people.  Sorola had to know once he was informed Mike Hernandez was behind all of this, that to rule against Mike would mean Montoya taking Sorola down.  He should have recused himself.  You cannot be a fair and independent judge when you are paying money to the propagandist to one of the parties in the lawsuit.  Such misconduct is very consistent with Sorola's conduct as a lawyer.

Unfortunately the FBI does not give a crap about us, and Saenz is too tied to Sorola's incompetence and corruption as an attorney he will never touch it.

The city based on the testimony can withhold payment to Mario Lozoya and bring their own action.

We need yesterday a highly qualified TOMA appellate lawyer on this.  The city needs to take immediate action to remove Cesar de Leon, Jessica Tetreau, and David Betancourt from the GBIC and if necessary dissolve the GBIC.  The court testimony and argument of counsel proves this. Let Mario sue, he has no leg to stand on.

I remind my readers I posted the clear case law that Oliviera lied to the court about irreparable harm.  Judge Sorola agreed with Oliviera even though the case law is so black and white that in a TOMA case no such evidence is needed.  Why?  Only a full criminal investigation will give us the answer.

Sorola I will defend myself from Montoya's endless lies and defamation.  You are simply too stupid to understand he will hang you.  Mike Hernandez will pay him to say what ever is necessary to win and that includes destroying you and your wife.  You were conflicted out and you knew it.


Yes Judge Sorola did try and equally control both sides.  In fact Cesar de Leon based on Sorola's words was one more prickish comment away from being held in contempt.  This is evidence of showing balance.  But just because he showed evidence of being balanced does not mean in every sense he was balanced.  Some of the evidentiary rulings were the result of poor preparation by Nurith Galonsky's lawyer.  But to say Nurith cannot testify about an email she saw, but Cesar can testify about minutes he does not have with him is clear evidence of bias.  It was clearly established Cesar de Leon on the 17th chose to not approve the essential minutes needed for the hearing.  Sorola knew what was happening and he let the con ride.

No comments: