22 September 2006

KingCast to NH Kelly Ayotte; Court: WTF your Honor, that's hearsay!

A few days ago I showed you why the AG's office coming after me for unauthorized practice of law is absurd (again) in light of NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415 (1963) because:
"...appellants and those associated with them may not be prohibited from acquainting persons with what they believe to be their legal rights and advising them to assert their rights by commencing or further prosecuting a suit against the Commonwealth of Virginia, any department, agency or political subdivision thereof...." and as noted in Sheet Metal Workers v. Mohawk Chemical et al., 1998 WL 51985 Ohio App. 5 Dist:"...the [Button] Court held that the NAACP had a First Amendment right to advise nonmembers and hire attorneys to represent nonmembers, in order to protect rights afforded by the Constitution."

Now that I've seen their Motion for Summary Jugdment, Attorney Constance Stratton (photo forthcoming) should in fact be sanctioned for trying to use what amounts to clearly indamissible hearsay against me, a former AAG myself. Read the annotated letter from Jackie Ellwood about me and the affidavit 1 and 2 (erroneously called a "Deposition" by current legal redress chair Casey Goodwin).

Attorney Stratton should also be sanctioned for her attempted ex post facto persecution of me, actually citing the new statute on attorney representation in her Motion for Summary Judgment, as opposed to 311:1 in effect at the time of the alleged offense! I am filing a Motion to Strike today before I head back down to CT for a weekend of work, as I prepare KingCast and writer James O'Brien for a rather nice art installation set to open in October.

Obviously, anything Ellwood (ironically a former art gallery owner) claims I said is inadmissible hearsay; it's not even sworn. And whatever Goodwin says I said to Toney or Ms. Dunchas is also hearsay, perhaps even double hearsay.

Duh.

Anyway, while Attorney Stratton's arguments may be sanctionable, at least she shook my hand; wasn't afraid the black would rub off, like Maria Proulx and Charlie Bauer -- who struggled to shake my hand in this picture, but in this movie you can watch him at 5:12 sulk right on past my narrow black ass.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm not a lawyer and this sure ain't legal advice. But if you are party to a case, defendant (criminal or civil case) or plaintiff (civil case). Isn't anything you have ever said admissible (at least as far as hearsay goes) as an admission of party opponent?

Christopher King said...

Yeah but first you gotta have some sworn statement and not hearsay. Whatever the Gallery owner says I said in a naked letter is hearsay.

That's where that tape the Gloria Timmons took of Willie Toney comes into play, instead of them trying to use some notes from the New Legal Redress Chair.

More on this later. Gotta get to work.

Peace.