California Case Update

Status
Not open for further replies.
For clarity, here's the source docket info, which makes a little more sense.

xfdocket-20120516.webp

113 now leads to a 'No public file...' message.
 
Do we know know Does 1 - 10 are? Is that a true number or a fictitious number meant to represent a possible number of different defendants that have not been defined yet?
 
The removed documents include the statements by IBs lawyer, the last of which was a communication that mentioned Antitrust, and how IBs lawyer confessed to the XF lawyers several times they were only interested in prolonging the lawsuit, correct?

Interesting to see that after those documents were released, first the thread on vB.com gets locked and vB customers get advance warnings that any further discussion on the topic of the lawsuit will lead to infractions, and now the documents are removed from PACER and refiled as sealed documents.

I'm guessing someone at IB suddenly got nervous.

Luckily, what has been seen...
 
Unfortunately, it's a little late for IB to now try and hide everything as its been posted... locked or not, hidden or not after the fact, once something has been made public online it's very difficult to retract it. Laugh my arse off at VB.
 
It is also interesting that an alleged reputable Law Firm would take on a case whose only intent is to bleed the Defendants into capitulation and then would have the arrogance to tell the other Law Firm thier intent.

I hope the Judge is taking note.

Am I the only person who finds this case more bizarre by the minute and who wonders why the Judge is happy to entertain such morally devoid behaviour. Is he pro American to the detriment of justice as he just doesn't seem to be fair IMHO.
 
HowardS said:
It is also interesting that an alleged reputable Law Firm would take on a case whose only intent is to bleed the Defendants into capitulation and then would have the arrogance to tell the other Law Firm thier intent.
Click to expand...

The goal of the IB lawyers ... RIGHT FROM THE START ... was to drag this out AS LONG AS POSSIBLE.
I hope the Judge is taking note.

Am I the only person who finds this case more bizarre by the minute and who wonders why the Judge is happy to entertain such morally devoid behaviour. Is he pro American to the detriment of justice as he just doesn't seem to be fair IMHO.
Click to expand...

American Justice is an oxymoron.
 
HowardS said:
So the first lawyers were replaced because?

1. They weren't willing to lie

2. They like to tell the truth

3. They have integrity

4. They can't be bought

Just thinking out loud:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

1. Lawyers don't lie, they manage the perception of truth.
2. Lawyers don't tell the truth, they tell a credible interpretation of how the truth might have been experienced.
3. Lawyers are amoral operators within the legal framework. They're interpretation of integrity is to not stray from that framework. A defense lawyer who KNOWS her client is guilty of rape because he confided that to her in the client/attorney relationship will and must do her best to have her defendant acquitted. Thats integrity to the legal framework, but not moral or personal integrity.
4. No, but they can be rented on an hourly rate.
 
Shamil said:
In order to remain compliant, with regards to this, so I don't run afoul of attorneys associated with the case, I have removed docket 113 in its entirety. The docket is no longer available through PACER. At this time, until otherwise instructed to do so, or such I will not publish, republish or make available the files contained within the docket.
Click to expand...

Shamil can you update the Blog to because 113 now take you to a page not found, if you can un-link it and refer to the new documents that would be great. Thanks for posting the documents.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom