Posted by
NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Wednesday, October 18, 2006 6:31:37 PM
BW writes
long comments on the DA Carol Chambers issue. They have lots of good material in them, so much that I can't adequately address them except individually.
Lastly, her contention that her threat was not directed at . . ., but at "collection agencies in general" is comical at best, and, at worst, a flat out lie. If that is what she meant, then that is what she should have said. But she didn't. Once again, poor judgement on her part especially given the fact that she knew she was being recorded.
So many of our joint themes are interrelated, and this is one. You speculated that Chambers likely wouldn't have gone to bat for anyone she didn't know. The interesting difference between your experience and mine is that I don't have to speculate about one of the issues I am raising.
Here's the situation. You will note that Attorney Regulation is vigorously prosecuting Chambers based on an allegation that she lied
that was made by an attorney. In mid 2005 I made not one but several similar allegations (false certifications, false arguments, withholding discovery by making false claims) in writing about my opposing attorney to both my judge and to attorney regulation. Neither could be troubled to take any action.
Court rules and Judicial ethics rules require the Judge to act, but they are toothless.
I find it more productive to discuss what has happened to me since I made the complaint, because the conduct didn't stop. It actually got worse. The attorney continued to avoid answering motions, and when we finally got a default judgment, he got the judgment reversed by claiming that for two years he hadn't checked his Lexus Nexus inbox. He forgot to account for, and the judge didn't bother to make him account for the time my attorney got wise to what was going on and double served him, an event I had included in my complaint to both the judge and to Attorney Regulation.
He also filed what my attorney called a "secret" motion in court papers. He tried to make it appear that he intended to reimburse my attorney's fees when he had no intention of doing so. We did get a judgment on him, but I'll never see the money.
Best of all was a second affidavit that he filed in support of the effort to get the judgment reversed. We had observed to the judge on three occasions that the Defendant had not paid a $150 judgment the judge imposed in 2003 as a part of our argument against reversal. One slick way (there are many) to avoid a perjury charge is to avoid claiming that you did something, but to claim that you distinctly remember doing something. So, an affidavit appeared in the next motion claiming that on a specific date that corresponded with an aborted pre-trial conference, the attorney distinctly remembered paying the $150 in cash to my attorney and didn't think it necessary to ask for a receipt. This supported a reply, which means we never got to respond.
BW, I'm happy for you that you are getting the charge that DA Chambers lied heard. But from my point of view, the whole thing STINKS of selective prosecution. An individual litigant can't stop ongoing misconduct, but an attorney makes a single complaint about a single incident and Attorney Regulation is all over it. Go Figure.
Your comment about local judges prejudging this meshes exactly with the RMN's comment about Chambers complaining about judicial conduct and my oft repeated view that lawyers protect judges, judges protect lawyers, but in Colorado, nobody protects the public.
------
I am no longer using a certain lawyer's name out of respect to BW. This blog is not about individuals, it is about the system.