Derrick Gillenwater goes head to head with Jeffrey Denner and First Amendment with YouTube video.

I like this kid. After trying to make his life right and do all things legal, his lawyers and the court screw him like there's no tomorrow. So now -- legally -- he just dares Jeffrey Denner to go get another morally bankrupt Judge to get an Order preventing him from posting his autobiographical song "The Mack is what they call me" on his MySpace (http://www.myspace.com/buckshotdamack) and in this rather interesting YouTube video/picture slide, courtesy of traedaddious. Jeffrey Denner makes an appearance in the video (via a fair use/public domain image), noted producer Gene Griffin does the same, and there is a nice shot of surveillance cameras with the tag line "Big Brother Wants Your Civil Liberties."

Now as you recall, and as Harvard Law's Citizen Media Law Project pointed out, prominent and wealthy Boston Attorney Jeffrey Denner is benefactor to Unlawful and Unconstitutional Orders from local judges who tried to take away my rights to blog but I smacked that down. However, they did take away Mr. Gillenwater's First Amendment and Fundamental Rights to blog about the valid legal malpractice case using public documents, or even to file basic briefs and motions. U.S. Attorney Eric Holder is not going to appreciate that.

I wonder what Mr. Gillenwater's next video will be, after he obtains a copy of the unlawfully-withheld transcript from Judge Linda Giles' January "Litigation Control Conference." This is a simple and basic Human Right in America, a copy of your courtroom transcript for Christ's Sake.

"Litigation Control" is the polite and euphemistic way to put it, however truthfully it is more akin to Castration.

PS: Who is Joanne Cavallaro? I have no idea if her case had any merit, but her accusations are interesting: 11/13/2002 #6 Request for Investigation into Mr. Denner's Actions and those of the Court to see if there has been a conspiracy to violate my civil rights and to cover up for the police, filed by Joanne Cavallaro with Certificate of Service.

Derrick Gillenwater to face off against Jeffrey Denner and other wealthy white people before U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.

Some time ago I wrote about Eric Holder -- America's first black Attorney General -- and suggested that this horrific case reach his desk. Well the law students inform me that they are preparing an extensive document for him; all they are waiting on is a certain transcript from Judge Linda Giles' chambers.

The reason is that Holder, according to his own mouth and by other news accounts including the Chicago Tribune, "Signals a more active Justice Department of Civil Rights issues." Holder said:

"We, as average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about race,'' said Holder, urging people of all races to use Black History Month as a platform for honest discussion of racial matters, including disparities in health care, education and income.

"If we are to make progress in this area, we must feel comfortable enough with one another and tolerant enough of each other to have frank conversations about the racial matters that continue to divide us,'' Holder told hundreds of Justice employees, suggesting that, while blacks and whites are integrated in many quarters, they still are segregated in their free time in "race-protected cocoons.''

Look at this case, and remember that there has been no finding of any frivolous conduct on the part of Mr. Gillenwater, who is attempting to fight his valid legal malpractice case pro se against some very wealthy white people, who are being protected by some very wealthy white judges, while everyone in Boston -- except for some activity by Harvard's Citizen Media Law Project -- turns a blind eye.

Judge Spurlock lied and said he could not refer this case to the BBO.
Mr. Gillenwater has no right to blog.
Mr. Gillenwater has no right to file any Motions.
Mr. Gillenwater has no right to request a real mediator.
Mr. Gillenwater cannot discover the name of the insurance carrier to file a 93A Demand, nor can he discover anything about Defendant Denner's history of any ethics or malpractice cases, including the one involving Oscar Atehortua, in which Denner's colleague in the case received a 2+ year suspension from practice for neglect. See BD 2001-045.
Mr. Gillenwater cannot receive a copy of the transcript he has been seeking in which Judge Linda Giles allegedly said some very prejudicial remarks about the merit of his underlying case, even though she hasn't seen any Motion for Summary Judgment, and even though the law on Summary Judgment in Massachusetts on these cases holds that the standards for post conviction relief and legal malpractice are basically the same:

Labovitz v. Feinberg 47 Mass.App.Ct. 306, 713 N.E.2d 379 Mass.App.Ct.,1999 July 16, 1999 (Approx. 9 pages). That court cites Belford v. McHale Cook & Welch, 648 N.E..2d 1241, 1246 (Ind.Ct.App.1995) ("The burdens on postconviction relief petition and a legal malpractice claim are the same.")
**********
Suggested reading: John M. Peckham v. Boston Herald, 48 Mass. App. Ct. 282 (1999) applied to Gillenwater v. Denner, Suffolk 2005-5469. Read also the Unconstitutional Order holding "The purpose was to prevent Gillenwater from using any references to the Defendant Jeffrey Denner."

What? Huh? Why? The Court can't do things like that in America, and for Jeffrey Denner to accept it and to be a benefactor of this sort of clearly unlawful activity that deprives a man of basic First Amendment and other Fundamental Rights makes him a total bigot in this instance, my previous respect for him dying by the minute.

Where is Derrick Gillenwater's January transcript before Judge Linda Giles in Gillenwater v. Denner et al, Suffolk 05-5469?

Ever since Judge Diane Moriarty (above) tried to give Justice a fair shake in Derrick Gillenwater's criminal case that preceded his valid Legal Malpractice claim against Jeffrey Denner and Kevin Barron (Suffolk 05-5469), things have not gone fairly for him. This has been noted by the Harvard Law School Berkman Center's Citizen Media Law Project. They wrote that basic court orders were Unconstitutional because of Prior Restraint concerns as levied against Plaintiff Gillenwater for no lawful reason.

I wonder what it does for the morale over at Denner-Pellegrino to know that their boss is benefactor of this unfair system that has taken away one of their former client's basic First Amendment Rights to file pleadings and to blog about or even discuss his case publicly. They probably just don't give a damn, just keep the shareholders happy and try to keep Mr. Gillenwater beat down.

Anyway, I want to know what's going on with that transcript from a January hearing he had with Judge Linda Giles. I got an email a while back from the law students where Mr. Gillenwater had claimed she even told him he needed permission from another judge to get a transcript from her own courtroom after she allegedly made biased statements to Mr. Gillenwater. Read about that here.

Now all of that is going to get even more interesting because I just received a link to Mr. Gillenwater's MySpace music page, and his material is quite good. The title track "Da Mack is what they call me" is in fact autobiographical and speaks about this case. I understand there is going to be a set of liner notes and some other multimedia program about all of this but I do not know if I will get access to more information on any of that before the CD comes out.

I wonder, will Attorney Denner actually have the nerve to move for an Emergency Restraining Order to silence his speech on that too, like the one he got against Mr. Gillenwater in the court before Judge Lauriat, as unlawfully upheld by Judge Spurlock as noted in this post (read the transcript of the Spurlock hearing; it's an insult to contemporary sensibilities on Justice). Coincidentally Denner met with Judge Lauriat yesterday in matters related to the Clark Rockefeller/Christian Karl Gerhartsreiter post.

Judge Lauriat and Judge Spurlock and Judge Giles have all violated Derrick Gillenwater's Fundamental and First Amendment Rights, and frankly I hope he exposes all of it through his music and whatever other channels he can use.

Clark Rockefeller/Christian Karl Gerhartsreiter may be insane, but what is Jeffrey Denner's excuse for his treatment of Derrick Gillenwater?

Prominent Boston Attorney Jeffrey Denner -- who is busy benefitting from all measure of Unconstitutional, classist and racist rulings made to thwart Derrick Gillenwater in his valid legal malpractice case against him -- made a bold but somewhat foreseeable move today in noticing his intent to use temporary insanity as an Affirmative Defense. As noted recently, the plea arrangement fell though so this is the chance for Attorney Denner to show that he and his posse are better lawyers than they were in the Gillenwater and Oscar Atehortua cases. I wonder if Jeffrey Denner will try to take down Derrick Gillenwater's MySpace music blog that I just got where he actually has written a song where he describes the scenario in "The Mack is what they call me." It's a good song. This guy can write music that's for certain.

Anyway on "Clark", let's just say that after all, looking at this guy, I think a first year law student could establish that he's got a serious mental defect. And I mean SERIOUS.

Would you let your daughter date this guy? Only if you disowned her, and canceled your life insurance policy, he-heh. Here is today's AP Story.

Jeffrey Denner might have a better chance of shutting down this blog if I called him a lying, whoring skank like Liskula Gentile Cohen.

Now I'm not actually saying that Liskula Cohen (or Jeffrey Denner) is indeed a skank or a ho, but as I understand it her lawsuit against an anonymous blogger is on very thin ground, in fact because she has apparently referred to herself "ho" on the friendster social network. Here's the girl in short shorts blog entry, and here is the Citizen Media Law Project blog entry (out of Harvard Law's Berkman Center) and analysis.

Anyway, I like the Citizen Media blog folks because they know what the hell they are talking about, and they know that the decisions that have been handed down against Derrick Gillenwater in his case against Jeffrey Denner are Unconstitutional, as noted in this entry. Again, the courts have protected powerful Boston Attorney Jeffrey Denner by not allowing Mr. Gillenwater to publicly speak, blog about, or to file any motions whatsoever in his legally valid claim of legal malpractice against Denner. These are basic, inalienable First Amendment and Human Rights that must be protected in a free society. There has been no finding of fact or law that Mr. Gillenwater has issued any frivolous pleadings so there is no basis for the Court to issue such a broad-sweeping First Amendment Prior Restraint against him.

Then, sadly, Judge Linda Giles affirmed those orders but refused to put it in writing, and even told Plaintiff Gillenwater he had to seek permission from some previous Judges in order to get a copy of the transcript from her courtroom, in which she also showed her bias against Mr. Gillenwater by stating that she didn't think his case had merit so he shouldn't worry about filing his Motion for Summary Judgment. The problem with that (well at least ONE of the problems) is that the burdens of proof for successful post conviction relief and legal malpractice are the same in Massachusetts. But not content to stop there, she then granted the wealthy and high-powered Defendants an extension of time in which to file their Motion for Summary Judgment, and she ignored Mr. Gillenwater's request for Mediation, made after the Defendants called him into a back-room session and tried to make him agree to a low-buck settlement with no licensed mediator present.

That's why Mr. Gillenwater should file a Motion to have Judge Giles recuse herself for unlawful bias.

And that's why I have it on Good Faith that Mr. Gillenwater will be appearing before the Full Panel of the Court of Appeals, given this protectionist mealy-mouthed Mickey Mouse Order the single Justice issued last week.

Jeffrey Denner is not a ho, nor is he a racist, but as a so-called Civil Rights Attorney he sure is pimping Derrick Gillenwater, benefitting from some patently Unconstitutional rulings and it has got to stop.

Clark Rockefeller/Christian Karl Gerhartsteiter goes to trial; stray critic of this blog gets straightened out on the facts.

So Clark Rockefeller/Christian Karl Gerhartsreiter will indeed have his Day in Court, which is more than Derrick Gillenwater has enjoyed.

"Attorney Jeffrey Denner said the defense team was unable to reach an agreement with prosecutors after extended negotiations. He would not say why the negotiations broke down."

[It must be rough to have negotiations break down, but then again Derrick Gillenwater would know all about that, seeing as he never got a mediator in his negotiations with Jeffrey Denner. He filed a Motion for a Mediator but that's been ignored by the Court and by Jeffrey Denner, surprise surprise, beat the baby seal some more willya.]

"Rockefeller's real name is Christian Karl Gerhartsreiter (GAYR'-hahrtz-ry-tur), a German national who moved to the United States in the late 1970s.

His true identity was revealed after he was accused of snatching his daughter, Reigh Boss, during a supervised visit in Boston in July. He was captured about a week later in Baltimore, and the girl was found safe.

The girl's kidnapping sparked a search from Long Island marinas to Caribbean islands. After investigators discovered his true identity, California authorities labeled Gerhartsreiter a "person of interest" in the 1985 disappearance and presumed slaying of a San Marino couple, Jonathan and Linda Sohus. Gerhartsreiter, who then went by the name Chris Chichester, was living in a guest house on their property when they disappeared.

In addition to parental kidnapping, Gerhartsreiter is charged with assault and battery, assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and giving a false name to police. Authorities said he pushed a social worker who was overseeing his visit with his daughter and jumped into a waiting car. The social worker received minor injuries when he tried to grab onto the car and fell to the ground."
****************
Meanwhile someone wrote me yesterday and clearly has the point and the intent of this blog all confused. I don't hate Jeffrey Denner, never have and never will. I just hate his actions in this case, and he's clearly taking advantage of an unfair system and Unconstitutional rulings, which does ultimately lower my perception of him as a Civil Rights lawyer and as a man.

Besides, don't complain to me, it was the folks over at Harvard Law School who also called the Courts primary (and continuing) Decisions in this case UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Read it right here at the Citizen Media Law Project. And not only that, Jeffrey Denner is hardly "defenseless." He's one of the wealthiest people in Massachusetts and he's free to post his comments on his blog or on my blog, which is one helluva lot more rights than Derrick Gillenwater has.

Here are some other issues Jeffrey Denner has had, including Derrick Gillenwater and Oscar Atehortua, and read the full conversation in the comments.

A most ridiculous, evasive and old boy network protectionist Order from the single Appeals Justice for Judge Linda Giles in Gillenwater v. Denner.

In yesterday's Spotlight Post about Suffolk Superior Judge Linda Giles we discussed the explicit requests of Plaintiff Gillenwater to, inter alia, have his First Amendment and basic Human and Civil Rights restored. But then the Court of Appeals impliedly denied that basic right without even mentioning it, and to add insult to injury, without ruling in Mr. Gillenwater's favor, impliedly directed Judge Giles to revisit the issue of whether Mr. Gillenwater can file basic pleadings, i.e. a Motion to Compel and a Motion for Summary Judgment. Keep in mind that the Defendants have been granted an extension to file their Motion for Summary Judgment, by Judge Giles, of course.

And guess what else? Plaintiff Gillenwater to my knowledge is STILL having a hard time getting a copy of that Court hearing in which Judge Linda Giles showed her outright bias and prejudice against his case, and even incorrectly told him that he had to ask permission of another judge to obtain a copy of the transcript from her own courtroom.

This is going straight to the U.S. Justice Department, and I hope Mr. Gillenwater approaches the full Appellate Bench with this nonsense: Look at the specific requested relief from this post, then look at that mealy-mouthed Order in comparison. God Damn this entire Court system and God Damn Jeffrey Denner -- a so-called Civil Rights lawyer -- for benefitting from this outright criminality.

REQUESTED RELIEF

1. May the Court please return my First Amendment Rights to blog about this case, and to talk about this case subject to the rules of Defamation regarding public figures.

2. May the Court please return my Fundamental Rights to file a Motion for Summary Judgment and a Motion to Compel relevant discovery about the Oscar Atehortua case.

3. May the Court appoint a visiting judge from another Federal Jurisdiction to monitor this case.

4. May the Court order an inquiry with the U.S. Justice Department regarding the Fundamental Civil Rights, Procedural and Substantive Due Process Rights that I have been denied in this case.

CONCLUSION

I have had my First Amendment Rights to free speech subject to Defamation taken away in an Unconstitutional Court Order. I have had my First Amendment and Substantive and Procedural Due Process Rights to file basic Motions taken away in an Unconstitutional Court Order.

We live in the United States of America, and I pray and hope to God that this Honorable Court will actually care enough about the preservation of these Rights to step forward and correct the wrongs that have been set against me.

Respectfully submitted,

_____________________________
Derrick Gillenwater