Monday, February 20, 2017

When GOP operative Jessica Medeiros Garrison isn't dreaming of landing a $10-million job, she tosses out other jumbo numbers like . . . well, penny candy

Jessica Medeiros Garris
When last we visited Jessica Garrison's Wide World of Cash, our heroine was convinced she was on the verge of landing a job that would pay her $10 million over a 10-year period. Those, however, are not the only fabulous figures Garrison threw out during testimony in her defamation case against Legal Schnauzer and me.

Garrison, as one might expect from a good Republican operative, sounds crazy about cash. So let's consider some of the other jumbo numbers from her testimony. (A transcript of testimony from Garrison and Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange is embedded at the end of this post.)

Our gal Jessica endures $25 million worth of "suffering"

Jessica Garrison claims under oath, in so many words, that our reporting about her extramarital affair with Luther Strange has caused her $25 million of damages. We're not making this up; you can read it on pages 65-67 at the transcript below. And this is from reporting that, as a matter of law, has never been found to be false or defamatory. God only knows how much she would be damaged if someone actually defamed her.

Here is part of the exchange between Garrison and her attorney, Bill Baxley:

Q. (MR. BAXLEY:) Jessica, if somebody offered you $25 million to let them do this to you publicly, what has been done, would you say it would be worth it?

A. No, sir.

Q. Have you had expenses that you've had to go through with us representing you?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And have you had expenses with trying to get Mr. Shuler served -

A. Yes, sir.

Q. -- over and over again?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. That's run up in the many thousands of dollars, hasn't it?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And you can't quantify what it's done to -- the dollar amount as far as the amount of mental anguish and suffering and angst this caused you, can you?

A. No, sir.

Q. But you say you wouldn't let somebody do this for $25 million for you?

A. Huh-uh (no).

Q. You need to speak up.

A. No, sir.

Q. So you would not let them do that for any amount of money, would you?

A. No. You couldn't pay me to go through this voluntarily.

Was any actual evidence presented that goes to the expenses Garrison concurred? Maybe canceled checks, invoices, etc.? Nope. Before the exchange above begins, something curious happens. It can be found on page 65 of the transcript:

MR. BAXLEY: Your Honor, I think that's all.

THE COURT: Is that all?

MR. BAXLEY: Yes, sir, I think so.

THE COURT: Approach, Mr. Baxley.

(A sidebar discussion was had off the record.)

Q. (MR. BAXLEY:) Jessica, if somebody offered you $25 million . . .

During the sidebar, one can almost imagine Judge Don Blankenship leaning toward Baxley and whispering:

Judge: Uh, Bill we're supposed to be establishing an extremely high figure for damages here; it's part of our plan to terrorize Mr. Shuler. But you haven't done that. You have to ask your client a leading question that establishes some outlandish figure for damages.

Baxley: Oh, that's right, Your Honor, I forgot about that. Haven't had my Jack Daniels yet today . . . heh, heh.

Judge: Will you please get some nutty figure in the record . . . and do it quickly, or I'm going to need some Jack Daniels.

Baxley: You got it, Donnie Boy. Comin' right up -- the nutty figure, that is. I don't share my JD.

Our gal Jessica is paid serious bucks for managing Luther Strange's campaign

On page 40 of the transcript, Garrison lets it be known that she is no regular working girl. She gets paid serious bucks -- $10,000 a month -- for her services:

Q. (MR. BAXLEY:) I'll show you what's been marked Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 10 and I'll ask you what that is.

A. That's my contract to serve as campaign manager for Luther's 2010 attorney general's race.

Q. And what did it call for you to be paid?

A. Ten thousand dollars a month plus expenses.

Q. And what else?

A. Oh, and they provided an iPhone, our computer -- our computer was a Mac. It was a portable computer -- and reimbursement of healthcare insurance premiums.

I don't claim to be a political insider, but $10,000 a month, plus expenses and various goodies (iPhone, Mac computer, etc.) for running an AG campaign in Alabama? Seems a bit high to me, especially for someone who had an 0-1 record at the time as a campaign manager.

Jessica doesn't just make big bucks, she pays big bucks -- and not very intelligently

On page 67 of the transcript, we learned that Garrison has paid Baxley and his firm more than $50,000 to bring the lawsuit against me:

Q. Has the amount you've had to pay for service and our services up to this point exceeded $50,000?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Have you had travel expenses having to come back to court when Mr. Shuler wouldn't show up?

A. Yes, sir.
As a party to the case, I have a pretty good idea of how much work Mr. Baxley and his firm put in. Here are the items I can recall:

* Baxley wrote me a couple of threatening letters, making outlandish misstatements of law;

* Someone wrote a complaint, which was filled with misstatements of fact and law.

* Baxley attended a couple of hearings where I was present, and probably 1-2 others where I was not present because I did not receive notice, making Garrison's $3.5-million judgment void.

* Someone printed out a bunch of blog posts and news articles, and it's not clear if any of them had to do with the matter being argued at the time -- whether Garrison's default judgment should be upheld or not. In essence, this was a "document dump," of little or no value.

There might have been a few other things Baxley and Co. did, but that's all I can think of right now. This much is certain: The Baxley lawyers did not engage in any discovery, there was no trial or trial preparation . . . so, how does Jessica Garrison wind up paying them more than $50,000? Were they charging her $10,000 an hour?

Was there any sign in the transcript that Garrison produced invoices or canceled checks to show she had been charged, and paid, $50,000? The answer is no.

If that amount was paid, did Garrison do it on her own, or did she have help? Did she walk "bravely" into filing a baseless lawsuit because someone was helping her with expenses? Did Baxley charge an outrageous amount because he knew Garrison's benefactors -- whoever they might be -- could afford it?

I know this: If Jessica Garrison paid Bill Baxley $50,000 for the puny and sorry work he did, she's the biggest dolt ever to land on planet Earth.


Anonymous said...

We've heard all this from you before, Roger.

Do you know what the definition of insanity is?

It is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

You lost the Garrison case, and others as well, in large part because you think you are competent in the law when clearly you are not.

In the Garrison case, you didn't have anything that you could provide a court that would prove your slander against her. You made baseless claims, avoided service, and alienated your lawyer. You defeated yourself.

You just keep repeating the same idiocy. I am sure the GOP doesn't like you. I even think that they are in many ways unethical and corrupt.

But you have your own problems, starting with your paranoia and sexual obsession.

BTW, I don't suggest you use Google Drive to share information that violates their terms of service. Your whole account will soon be suspended.

legalschnauzer said...

Always funny to be accused of being incompetent in the law by someone who can't get the simplest stuff right. Consider this from @7:17 --

"In the Garrison case, you didn't have anything that you could provide a court that would prove your slander against her."

There is a thing called "burden of proof" in the law, and it's on the plaintiff -- in this case, that's Garrison. She had to prove my posts were libelous (not slanderous), and she couldn't.

Hence, we can dismiss everything @7:17 writes because he's ignorant, just like the many "commenters" associated with Ashley Madison and/or TrumpWorld.

BTW, "if you've heard it all before," why are you still here reading?

Anonymous said...

Jessica seems to have visions of grandeur.

Anonymous said...

Aboard the Eliza Battle the Stranger in the Shadows was giving a briefing on his recon-mission to the General's dwelling. He showed them the book and newspaper he had brought back. Sheldon remarked he could visualize the General reading "How to Lead a Painted Pony", But he could not visualize the General reading the Arts and Culture section of the "Montgomery Advertiser". The Stranger replied that the book was almost word for word of the Shuler's lawsuit Transcript and the General had a old painting on the wall. It was titled "Phyllis on Aristotle" and he swore the man's face looked just like Big Luther.
The Admiral asked the Stranger what he thought Mike's next move would be. The Strange replied that Mike is keeping his cards close to his vest but he did observe a couple of card games while on his mission. The first game involved Bentley and Big Luther sitting on Bentley's left. Bentley was very clumsy putting his cards in his hand and dropped an Ace on the floor. Big Luther put his foot over the Ace and as he reached down to pick it up , he left a six on the floor. The Stranger replied Bentley used greed to trick Big Luther the same way he tricked him into accepting the senate job. Bentley said the person he appointed would have the job until the 2018 elections. Big Luther figured he could win a special election in 90 days ,but did not want to gamble on winning in 2 years. With Big Luther gone , Mike has his own man as Attorney General.
During the second game , McGregor sat in for one hand, Folded his cards and left. The FBI from the Hibernia folded his cards ..looked at Mcgregor's folded cards which consisted of 4 Kings and followed McGregor. McGregor went to the "Montgomery Advertiser" and placed an article in the paper. The Admiral inquired what the article said. The Stranger replied that the article is on the back page of this arts and culture section. The Admiral looked and said "I'll be Damned". Ms Chapelle wanted to see the article. She Replied that all she sees is some scantly clad women enjoying spring break on the front page and a wedding announcement on the back page. The Stranger asked her to tell every one who got married and the identity of the people in the wedding picture. Ms Chapelle replied that Mcgregor's granddaughter got married and the people in the picture are Mr and Mrs Mcgregor and their special Friend ,Steve Harvey as in Radio and TV celebrity. The Stranger said McGregor does not need the Riley controlled media to get his story out . The Illegal prosecution of the Bingo trial Defendants is going to be National News.

Sigmund said...

Visions of grandeur can be a sign of a personality disorder, especially histrionic or narcissistic:

Anonymous said...

Jessica is the perfect Republican. She exalts cash over all else. I thought maybe she was just a "power grab gal," but it's clear from this testimony that she is all about the cold, hard green stuff.

Anonymous said...

What you describe, 10:33, doesn't sound much different from your garden-variety streetwalker.

Anonymous said...

Baxley must have been heavily "medicated" on the sauce that morning. Hell, the judge had to tell him how to interrogate his own witness. Hysterical stuff!

Igor said...

Jessica wanted $25 million, and she only got $3.5 -- and she had to cheat to get that? Hell, I'd say she lost the case

Anonymous said...

Lutha paid Jessica $10,000 a month? For what?

legalschnauzer said...

"Services rendered"? It certainly wasn't because of her sterling history as a campaign manager. Her record was 0-1. She had never managed a winning campaign in her life.

Anonymous said...

If anyone doubted Blankenship was in the tank on this one, this transcript should remove all doubt.

Anonymous said...

But . . . but . . . Lutha said she was "the best in the business."

legalschnauzer said...

Maybe that depends on what "business" he was talking about. She certainly had no demonstrated history of success as a campaign manager.

Anonymous said...

I hear that Luther Strange has a history of paying young women big bucks to be "campaign manager." and then using them as sex toys. It happened in 2010 and again in 2014. This is the "secret" that Kevin Turner holds over Luther's head, the secret that helped young Mr. Turner get appointed chief of staff for Sen. Strange.

Anonymous said...

Garrison paid Baxley more than $50,000 for that weak-ass shit? Jeebus!

Anonymous said...

A lot of things don't make sense about Garrison, but here is the biggest one to me: She claims to have paid Baxley more than $50,000 to get her a $3.5. million default judgment, but then says she would cough all that up if LS would pay $1 and take down the offending posts.

That doesn't make a lick of sense. It also tells me that you don't make such an offer unless you know the articles to be true and you know the public believes them to be true.

Anonymous said...

Would be interesting to know how much Baxley and Garrison paid Davy Hay to be their bee-atch for a few weeks. Sounds like he was more than willing to sell his own client down the river.

legalschnauzer said...

Davy Hay is not fit to be a lawyer for anybody. He contacted me, not the other way around, and then stabbed me in the back. I've met a lot of con artists in this journey, but he was one of the worst. The only good news is that we were on strict contingency, and I didn't pay him a dime. Worthless SOB.

Anonymous said...

I wonder how many actual living, breathing clients JMG has at Balch Bingham. Would any of the lawyers there even recognize her, except for the ones who read your blog?

legalschnauzer said...

Once we get back to Birmingham, I will have access to court records and will be able to tell you exactly. My guess is that the number is zero or close to it.

She also apparently no longer works for RAGA or any similar outfit, doesn't appear to have any legit law practice, and yet she moved into a Mountain Brook home worth about $800,000 -- twice what her previous house was worth.

How do you pull that off?

Davy Hay said...

Mr. Shuler, I will warn you one last time:

Cease slandering me in your blog, or face legal consequences.

Immediately remove comments here that indicate that I accepted bribes. These are untrue claims, as you are very well aware. Shame on you for allowing them. Reports that you have impersonated visitors to your site and written false comments seems completely in character for you.

We both know the truth: you refused to heed my advice, acted unwisely several times, and then refused to pay me. Insult me all you wish, but you were by far the worst client that I have ever had. Why, one might begin to think that you purposefully lost the case in order to become a martyr! Truly pathetic.

As I stated above, Mr. Shuler, this is your last chance. I have begun to gather evidence, and since your comments negate the attorney-client relationship, I am afraid things are about to get even more difficult for you. A word to the wise, Mr. Shuler: seek competent legal counsel for your wife. Your foolishness and poor judgement damages not just you, but her as well!


Davy Hay

unwise wife who

legalschnauzer said...

Davy Hay:

Blow it out your ass.

Wren Eureka said...

Well Davy Hay should be disbarred for this! He must be the worst lawyer in the state. Horse whipping is just the beginning!

Yngvie M. Steen said...

Roger, will you be posting the entire transcript online - so your readers can review it in full and make their own judgment - or will you stick to cherry-picking excerpts that you think support your case?

legalschnauzer said...

The entire transcript is there at the bottom of the post, listed as Exhibit 4. You can't see that? You didn't read the post, which tells you where to find it? Sheesh.