What happened to the Scribd Accounts?

We all know Bill Christy, he's the guy who wrote "Try Gregory Floyd for Murder" to which I actively contributed, as one can see in this post. He's also the one who publicly said "I would have shot Bruce McKay as well," as noted in this post. He also argued that Floyd was in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1), now he says he isn't. And we know that he calls blacks he doesn't like "Niggers" and incessantly follows me around, and has been posting most of my SSN number that he found on an obscure document that I accidentally posted 3 years ago because he can't stand the fact that I exposed his Janus-faced nature.

Well yesterday I get wind of the fact that he lied and told Scribd.com that he was the sole author of the material and that I was in DCMA copyright violation. Scribd.com thus removed "Try Gregory Floyd for Murder" and my entire account, on a first strike. Not knowing what the heck happened, I posted it back up in another of my Scribd.com accounts, then once Scribd.com told me what happened I apologized and sent them the proof that I had editorial and content input and they initially told me I should write a counter-affidavit, which I said I would do.

As all of my public documents, with thousands and thousands of reads on them were on Scribd.com, I wrote them back when they initially told me I could write a counter-affidavit. They were quite rude and Mr. Bently lied, telling me there was a "zero tolerance" policy on Copyright, but that's not true, read their own website here and here:

"DMCA copyright infringement takedown notification policy

Submitted Feb 13 by Jason Bentley

It is our policy to respond to clear, legally valid notices of alleged copyright infringement that comply with the criteria established by Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") of 1998. In addition, we terminate without notice the accounts of users that we determine are repeat infringers based on a "three-strikes" policy."

"As an Internet service provider, Scribd must comply with the terms of the DMCA that require us to terminate the accounts of users determined to be "repeat infringers.""

Swift action for policy offenders: On every document upload page, there is a prominent warning message and mandatory check box displayed to help ensure that people understand and comply with Scribd’s Terms of Service. Repeat copyright infringers are banned from Scribd."

But this is at most two strikes, and the second violation (on the same case) came before I received notification from Scribd that I was allegedly in violation, but nonetheless they have removed my ability to file a counter-affidavit. So now I have to sue these guys -- who will not tell me the name of their corporate counsel -- naturally. I'll be down at the ACLU tomorrow, the same ACLU who wrote the Mass SJC briefs for Derrick Gillenwater after I sent him over there as Boston Bob.

Moral of the story: Always keep your emails, never trust Bill Christy -- he's a slippery, slimy sort of LE, kind of like what the folks at MASSCOPS called Marty Dunn: A slime bag.

Boston Bob withdraws postings.

There will be no further posts involving a certain attorney. While I operate independently of Derrick Gillenwater, neither he nor I need any flack from anybody at this time. He is getting his life back together after a harrowing ordeal and that is all I will say.

Will Barack Obama have to sue Citibank for racial discrimination again, this time for Derrick Gillenwater?

I got a report back that Citi Bank refused to cash Derrick Gillenwater's settlement check for his legal malpractice case against prominent Boston Attorney Jeffrey Denner. As I understand it, he had tried last week, they told him his ID was expired and they would cash it when he got a replacement. He got a replacement but now two different branches gave him the runaround and THREATENED TO ARREST HIM!!!

This strikes me as a wrongful dishonor situation so I'll publish the names of those involved for public awareness.
UPDATE: Washington Street Branch manager is Carlo Caramanna and the District Manager is Tim Sullivan.
UPDATE: It is a wrongful dishonor per Your Style v. Mid Town Bank of Chicago, 150 Ill. App. 3d 421, 427-28, 501 N.E.2d 805 (1986) as noted in this Indiana government website and in this Bankers Online article, "Cashing Checks for non-customers."

Meanwhile a quick search on racial discrimination yields this interesting lawsuit against Citibank by none other than Barack H. Obama, alleging that the bank was disparately treating minorities in lending.

Apparently they never learn, so they'll have to be taught again.

Or did Jeffrey Denner issue a bogus check to buy time or get his ass off the hot seat because he knew that a certain Civil Rights organization is waiting in the wings to help Mr. Gillenwater? Only time will tell.

Heroin criminal defendant Kevin L. Barron, Esq. is for whom the bell tolls.

From my last post comments:

Anonymous said...
Buckshot

Barron looks like an undertaker in that chair.

Watch out for the snake.

Jill

March 19, 2009 12:01 PM

I don't know if he fancies himself a Kamikaze or Suicide Bomber - or just a liar who gets another continuance based on claims that he's involved in settlement but really is not -- but Kevin Barron is about to face some serious music.

Speaking of music, here's Derrick Gillenwater's MySpace:
http://myspace.com/buckshotdamack

And here's Norfolk District Attorneys William R. Keating and David Traub, who'll get a visit from me shortly so they can fully understand what kind of criminal defendant they're working with here, Norfolk Case no. 2008-350.

Boston Bob gives heroin-defendant and lawyer Kevin Barron the rest of the week to reconsider his Rule 3.3 Candor to the Tribunal issues.

Dear Walpole/Norfolk Prosecuting Attorneys and Board of Bar Overseers:

Defendant Barron is still clubbing a defenseless seal and former client named Derrick Gillenwater:

I am sending a copy of this post on March 17, 2009 to Defendant Kevin L. Barron and his attorney Michael Cunningham, as I noted that Kevin L. Barron, charged with heroin possession and distribution in Norfolk 2008-350 and the lone remaining Defendant in the valid legal malpractice case of Gillenwater v. Denner et al., Suffolk 05-5469, has in my opinion deliberately and intentionally lied to the Court in violation of Rule 3.3 Candor toward the Tribunal. How did he do that? by getting a continuance on Summary Judgement for settlement purposes, then refusing to make a settlement counter-offer.

FACT: On March 10, 2009 Barron, by and through Attorney Michael Cunningham wrote:

"1. The defendants respectfully assert that there is good cause to allow this motion to enlarge the tracking order deadlines. See Superior Court Standing Order No. 1-88(D)(1)(amendments to tracking orders will be granted for “good cause shown”). As set forth above, parties are engaged in ongoing attempts to resolve this case prior to the service of defendants’ motions for summary judgment. "

FACT: But it is now March 17 and no settlement offer. This is yet another in a long line of abuses suffered by Plaintiff Gillenwater as the Court has continually treated this young black man as legal pariah, all because he has the stones to sue his high-powered, wealthy white attorneys. In my opinion, it is not conduct becoming of a licensed attorney(s) and it needs to be reviewed in conjunction with his adjudicated "Ineffective Assistance of Counsel," by Judge Diane Moriarty as noted in my very first post.

Note that it was yet another "emergency motion" that was rewarded with an "emergency ORDER" but that the Court STILL HAS NOT MOVED on Plaintiff Gillenwater's goddamn "emergency motion" to have his basic First Amendment and Fundamental Rights restored to even file pleadings!

There are a set of attorneys reviewing this matter, and when they spring into action I wish them all of the luck in the World to get this thing straightened out as I prepare to pummel these guys with opt-in emails, demonstrations at CLE seminars, law school fliers and whatever else it takes to expose this legally and morally corrupt activity.

Remember, Derrick Gillenwater still does not even know the name of the insurance carrier, 6 months after asking, and the Court knows all about it and does not care, just as the Court has now failed to address the (admittedly vague) ORDER from the Court of Appeals to take further action on Plaintiff's request to file basic pleadings -- which was taken from him even though there has been no finding that he filed anything that was frivolous. Somehow I feel that there is at least one bag man involved in this.

Heroin.

Legal Malpractice and heroin-possession/smuggling charged Defendant Kevin Barron says: "When I get cocky, and I feel just like Jesus' Son... I think I can fight Derrick Gillenwater and win...." Dream on, Kevin. Dream on. Lou Reed understood it and you don't. The harder you play this hand the harder you're going to fall.

Lou Reed: Heroin.

Kevin Barron: Heroin.

Derrick Gillenwater: No Heroin.

Boston Bob: No Bullshit.

Well the scummy insurance company pulled the rug out from under Derrick Gillenwater on Settlement of Gillenwater v. Denner and Barron.

Well Derrick Gillenwater still doesn't know who the insurance carrier is -- which is totally illegal since he has probably asked about a dozen times, with the Court being fully aware of it. What he does know is that the insurance company can't seem to get him a check; he was promised on Friday, then some complications arose and he was promised "Monday."

It is now Monday, and the law students told me Mr. Gillenwater is just a bit upset over all of this. I completely understand his frustration.

What I don't understand is how Kevin Barron thinks he is going to fight this case, even though if anyone had an argument out of it it was Denner, because Denner was mostly vicariously liable; Barron is the one who did all of the "work." But I suppose if the Court continues to gag Mr. Gillenwater and stuff him in a broom closet Barron has a fighting chance. But something tells me Counselor Barron is in for a Big Surprise, one almost as big -- if not bigger -- than his ongoing heroin problems.

Maybe THAT's why he's not thinking clearly: If he's getting high on his own supply -- you know, provided that he "possessed" such a supply within the meaning of the Law -- that would certainly explain things.