27 November 2009

KingCast replies to Sam Shaulson and Citibank on Motion to Compel and Motion to Strike.

Complainant's Reply Memorandum on my Motion to Compel:
The Documents are combined in one here at wepaper, I will embed later.

"Despite clear and repeated warnings, Citibank has allowed for the spoliation of crucial video that would show my behavior at the bank to be exemplary and would show that they knew exactly who JRT is: In those videos one can see her get the paperwork and sit in the offices in order to open an account!

See MacLellan v. Shaw's Supermarket, Inc., 24 Mass. L. Rep. 317 (2008)

Plaintiffs filed a motion for sanctions against the supermarket for spoliation of evidence, alleging a failure to preserve a scissor lift, destruction of a surveillance video, improper documentation of the incident, and inadequate maintenance records……..

The same was true of the video tape. The court noted that the video which might have shown the sequence of events that resulted in the alleged injury was material and relevant evidence.

Despite clear and continual warnings to maintain video from all visits to the bank – including the time when their staff called me a “motherfucker” and extended their index fingers -- Citibank’s niggardly response is now to provide Respondent claims that I am “playing games” with the legal system for not providing them the full name of my girlfriend, the allegedly “unidentified woman” for whom Citibank most definitely opened a bank account. That is ludicrous as I provided her initials, and Citibank knows when she was at the bank (with Derrick Gillenwater and me) and it is a simple matter for them to see that they did indeed open a bank account for her.

From the Reply Memorandum on my Motion to Strike.

"...All grievances were DISMISSED. Even more interesting is that the Columbus Bar Association seems to be giving the Respondent more information than they gave me: When I asked for the information and disposition of anonymous complaints that came in from New Hampshire they refused to tell me who it was, only now I come to find out that the Columbus Bar Association freely shared that information with Respondent.

I never got the identity of the accusers that the Bar Association provided to Respondent at will. Fascinating." See Attachment 1.



Anonymous said...

Anonymous complaints are just that anonymous. The peoples names may not be known, nor if they are do they have to be given. To do so would shake the very foundation of many investigations if citizens were misled that their identities would not be revealed.

Anonymous said...

huckster do we smell a lawsuit against the Columbus Bar Association I think not, they would welcome you to appear in court.

Christopher King said...


You dumb ass once the Bar Association provides the information to Citibank it's no longer an anonymous complaint, you are one stupid individual that's for sure.

Damn you are dumber than a box of hammers.


I will deal with Columbus Bar Association in Due Course; they can explain the substantive procedural and substantive Due Process issues at such time, thank you.

-The KingCaster

Christopher King said...

PS: What you jarheads fail to realize is that under the law I cited with the O'Neill case, the information should have been released to me once I waived Confidentiality, this way I can publish the grievances online for you idiots to read:


From the Memorandum:

Even more interesting is that the Columbus Bar Association seems to be giving the Respondent more information than they gave me: When I asked for the information and disposition of anonymous complaints that came in from New Hampshire they refused to tell me who it was, only now I come to find out that the Columbus Bar Association freely shared that information with Respondent. I wrote, inter alia:

I now respectfully ask for him (Bar Counsel Bruce Campbell) to retract his statement to me that he would not provide a copy of the anonymous 2005 complaint, my response and the disposition of said complaint to me under any conditions: I hereby request that the file be made public and waive any confidentiality on it per Disciplinary Counsel v. O'Neill, 75 Ohio St.3d 1479, 664 N.E.2d 532 Ohio 1996. Also, I would greatly appreciate clarification on these questions……..


PPS: What you jarheads need to be more concerned about is the case law on spoliation of evidence and the fact that they have access to know who JRT is.

Now I have specifically told the Investigator who JRT is so they can get her name from MCAD -- but of course they already have her name and had her on video. They are trying to play games well they are about to get a smackdown, pure and simple.

-The KingCaster

Anonymous said...

huckster if the person makes an anonymous complaint there is no name so you can't harass the hell out of them like you do everone who disagrees with you. BFD you provided "her" intials are you so ignorant or stoned not to realize that there are pobably other people with the same initials. The bank doesn't have to legally provide you with squat about anyones account information....you are one dumb "attorney" no wonder they yanked your license. Please be sure to let us know when you want to go back to Ohio to take on the Ohio Bar Association and the Ohio Supreme Court, I know someone willing to take you back there for free. The Columbus Bar Association has shared your file information with a number of different people, and jackass it's "dumber than a pile of rocks"

Christopher King said...

Ditmar DUMBKopf.

It's not that I provided her initials, it's the fact that they can read her name on the back of their own exhibit.

They know when she was in the office.

They can match her signature and look up her name by signature impression that's what banks do with signatures these days what are you stoned you ignorant Aryan wannabe?

But thanks for making that reminder that the Columbus Bar Association shared my file with people other than me, in direct contravention of published law in the O'Neill case.

Thanks for that :)

-The KingCaster

Christopher King said...

Hey Ditmar thanks for helping out despite your best intentions to be an Aryan wannabe tool.


I'll be amending my Reply Memoranda to note that not only can one read the name one the back of the canceled check, bank scan images as a virtual signature; that's how they check signatures. Therefore the bank is fully aware that they opened a bank account for "JRT" and Attorney Shaulson should be summarily sanctioned for yet another deceitful and dilatory (in)action.

This in addition to the fact that they could have checked their own records for the day date and time in question and sorted that out in minutes.

Query, what if we really were dangerous people or terrorists, does Respondent hold the position that they would not be able to provide any information about the identity of "JRT" and whether they opened an account for her?

Citibank's position is 100% Sanctionable.


Looks like everywhere I go, you go but that's only fitting because you're here all the time in my comments trash talking but you don't even have the sack to call me a nigger, at least Bill Cwissy said what he felt.


-The KingCaster

Christopher King said...

Well I'm done posting for the evening that's for sure, just reminding the dingbat DUMBKopf one more time:

I never got the identity of the accusers that the Bar Association provided to Respondent at will. Fascinating." See Attachment 1.

That means the Complaint is no long "anonymous" can you deal with that concept?

That means I should have been entitled to receive the same information, can you deal with that concept?

Well whether or not you can it's just Common Sense anyway.

Later Hater.

-The KingCaster

Christopher King said...

But Ditmar was wrong about the Patric McCarthy case when he wrote this more than a year ago with his buddy Snowy/JMO/Lynn/Sasquatch:


Snowy White wrote:
"Patric McCarthy--Another NH LE Coverup"
The title of this thread, as submitted by "Detective Columbo" is not a statement of fact.
The premise is merely his opinion, and is very amateurish.

More fevered speculation by you-know-who. There is no story, just another attempt to generate publicity for a chance at fame and riches.

But it will never happen here. Probably not anywhere.

......The problem is, the Massachusetts Prosecutors, the Lieutenant Governor and many other respected LE disagree with that analysis and argue in favor of re-opening the investigation:


... Evidence has been brought forward that raises new questions concerning the case," Massachusetts Lt. Gov. Timothy Murray wrote in an Oct. 5 letter. "The United States Attorney's office in Massachusetts, as well as the McCarthy family, have found substantial evidence to revisit whether or not foul play was involved and to warrant a new look at the case by your office."


Then he wrote this:

To the conspiracy theorists, these statistics will constitute ironclad PROOF that the FBI, union leader, and CQ press are allied with the conspirators at Daily Kos, the state AGs office, the CIA, and various corporations with real estate holdings in the state.

You can't argue rationally with whackos. They are best just watched and utilized for amusement purposes, IMO.

....Which shows his ignorance because right about then the FBI was most definitely still reeling from a proved conspiracy in Boston, what a whacko idiot for not knowing that.

They framed Joe Salvati, read the last paragraph.

"Massive Payout" (BBC Coverage)

So Ditmar next time you open your wannabe proud Aryan mouth take time to see if you know WTF you're talking about. The only time I've heard you say something intelligent I captured it on video, in my KingCast short film that you helped fund, "Franconia 5/11: Injustice on Stilts."

KingCast: Just keepin' it real.

Christopher King said...

And you know what else?

The more Citibank fights this the more I get to expose what REALLY happened in NH to the MCAD office of lawyers, with Citibank hero Kelly Ayotte showing her true malfeasance.

Here's her Right-to-Know Ethics violations; she never even saw to it that a 2006 Annual Report was issued, just the facts.

Read her true legacy here.

Franconia, Liko Kenney
Nashua, Michael Paulhus
Nashua, Christopher King
Jaffrey, Aaron Deboisbriand
Dalton, Diane Lyon
Hooksett, Gerard Beloin
Statewide: Carey Carlberg/Trooper's mediation
Statewide: Same-sex marriage
National, Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood (imploded on remand and Judge Di Clerico awarded attorney fees a coupla' weeks ago hahahahaha they kept that out of most major press but KingCast don't play that).
Lisbon, names and circumstances withheld at present

Old School: The Dow Murders, which I asked Kelly to reinvestigate. Fat chance of that, she's too busy plugging the dike with all of her available digits anyway.