Tuesday, November 7, 2017

Missouri public defender Patty Poe seeks to withdraw from Carol's "assault" case, while prosecutor Nicholas Jain files notice that he will not be seeking jail time


Carol Tovich Shuler
The Missouri assistant public defender who was assigned to represent my wife, Carol, has filed a motion to withdraw from the case. On top of that, the prosecutor in the matter has filed a notice that he will not seek jail time

Patty Poe's effort to exit the case came after a meeting last Monday (10/30) in which she repeatedly lied to Carol about relevant law in the "assault of a law enforcement charge" at the heart of State v. Carol T. Shuler (No. 1631-CR07731) -- the docket of which can be viewed at case.net. I was present for the meeting and tried my best (not always with success) to keep my mouth shut -- but I don't think I've ever heard a lawyer tell so many lies in a relatively short sitting. And this was from someone we once held in high regard, for whom we once had high hopes.

Carol made it clear in the meeting that we weren't buying the bullshit Poe was feverishly shoveling. So, two days later (Wed. 11/1), Jain filed State's Notice of Jail Waiver, meaning he is not seeking jail time in the matter. Poe followed up by filing her Motion for Leave to Withdraw yesterday morning. (Both documents are embedded at the end of this post.)

Poe notified us of the filing via e-mail, saying in part:

Additionally, the State filed a notice of jail waiver (attached). Therefore, I will be withdrawing my representation pursuant to RSMo 600.042.4(2). My motion to withdraw will be heard on November 22 at 9:00 AM, you need to be there anyway. If the judge sustains my motion to withdraw you will need to hire private counsel or represent yourself. The good news is, they can only seek a fine, community service, or some type of class instead of jail time.

I will not be doing any further work on your case.

It's news to us that Poe was doing any worthwhile work on Carol's case -- other than repeatedly making assertions that are contrary to relevant, and easily understood, law. The Missouri statute that Poe cites as grounds for withdrawal states:

4. The director and defenders shall provide legal services to an eligible person:

(2) Who is detained or charged with a misdemeanor which will probably result in confinement in the county jail upon conviction, including appeals from a conviction in such a case, unless the prosecuting or circuit attorney has waived a jail sentence;

As you can see, Jain's waiver of jail time provided the grounds for Poe to withdraw. Was this an orchestrated effort to help give Poe and the PD office a graceful exit from a case they did not have the stomach, or the integrity, to handle? Obviously, yes.

Is it likely that Poe's boss (Rod Hackathorn, Greene County PD) and perhaps Hackathorn's boss (Michael Barrett, State PD) were involved -- along with Jain's boss (Dan Patterson, Greene County PA). Yes, that is highly likely, especially when you consider "the director and defenders" language highlighted above.

Is this a classic example of two groups of lawyers taking unethical actions to cover their collective asses -- while also carrying water for a sheriff, Jim Arnott, who is so corrupt he should wind up in federal prison for his actions in knowingly bringing false charges against Carol? No doubt, in my mind.

The Poe and Jain motions are due to be heard at Carol's next hearing, at 9 a.m. on Nov. 22 before Judge Margaret Holden Palmietto.

I see these latest developments as a case of almost all good news and very little bad news. The main bad news is that Poe, who came on board in May, cost Carol about five months of time. Also, it means Carol might have to represent herself -- a notion that does not thrill her; but in my view, it's way preferable to having an untrustworthy lawyer, one who has no problem looking you in the eye and lying to your face.

The good news? I see a number of possibilities:

(1) We might land a private attorney, someone who has the smarts and integrity to see this for what it is -- a meaty case that stands to make a difference in the sewer-like justice system of southwest Missouri;

(2) It's nice that Carol no longer is facing possible jail time, but if prosecutors think that is going to encourage her to plead guilty to something she did not do, they had better think again;

(3)  Carol's pro se motions, which should have caused the charge to be dropped months ago. might now see the light of day. Poe was blocking them because it was her "opinion" that she did not agree with legal arguments in the motions. Did Poe ever make any citations to law that pointed to problems with the motions? Nope. Will Carol, or her representative, be calling for Palmietto to hear the motions -- or ones similar to them? I sure as heck hope so;

(4) We no longer have to listen to Poe's stale con-woman act. Carol and I have had lawyers lie to us for more than 17 years, over two regions of the country, and we are more than a little tired of it. We also catch onto it pretty quickly. I'm not sure Patty Poe is even 30 years old, so she is awfully young to have already become a sell-out. Perhaps that's the only way she sees to get ahead in the postmodern legal world -- and she might be right about that. But I want no part of her cynical, dishonest, game-playing routine.

What drove this deal that Poe and Jain (and perhaps their superiors) cooked up? Just how gross was Poe's duplicity toward Carol in recent weeks and months? We will address those questions in upcoming posts.

For now, let's consider this irony: Poe's office recently served notice that it is so slammed with work that it could not handle a first-degree murder case. If they are so busy, why do they have time to lie to Carol -- over and over? Why does Poe have time to tell Carol that her case likely will go to trial when, by law, it must be booted on a whole host of grounds? They want to have a trial, in a case where even the alleged "victim" admits he "caused physical contact" with Carol, not the other way around -- meaning Carol could not, under Missouri law, have "assaulted" him?

I'm not sure why someone like Patty Poe goes into the legal profession, but her handling of Carol's case suggests it certainly is not to further the cause of justice.








71 comments:

Anonymous said...

At some point, this begs the question, "Is it the entire legal profession or is it just you?" I'm going with the latter. Anything else is the position that the entire American legal system is out to get you, and you alone. And that's sheer paranoia.

Anonymous said...

So now you’re crossways with the lawyer that only two months ago you guys were celebrating and hugging. Who could have ever forseen this development?

If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes throughout the day, you’re the asshole.

Grow up, Roger and Carol. Quit acting out. Stop talking down to people. You’re only hurting yourselves.

p.s. blogging about your lawyer on here may be one of the most self-destructive, ignorant things I’ve ever witnessed.

legalschnauzer said...

@6:44 --

Your comment is so stupid and void of logic that I thought about not running it. But I decided it might be instructive for other readers to see the low-wattage "thoughts" of those who essentially support legal and law-enforcement corruption. Either way, your comment certainly doesn't merit a response from me. Not worth my time to attempt reason and citation of facts with someone who clearly enjoys having his head stuck up his ass. Great view, huh?

Anonymous said...

LS, you are a better lawyer than any of these clowns. You should represent Carol yourself.

Anonymous said...

One would hope that Anonymous @6:44 will one day (soon) be allowed the experience of being served by one or more of the crooks who cook the legal system as they please.

D.M.
Phenix City, AL

Anonymous said...

Earth to @6:44 . . . LS is not a party to this case, so not sure how this is an example of the legal profession being out to get him. Also, this is good news for Carol and LS. They are rid of a worthless public defender, and Carol no longer has the hint of jail time hanging over her head. Big win for the good guys. Now, go back to sticking your head up your ass.

Anonymous said...

How dense are you, 6:44? LS has been hinting for weeks that Poe was compromised, and now he is proven correct. That's not paranoia, it's foresight.

Anonymous said...

Wow, this is great news. Didn't see it coming. How did it happen?

legalschnauzer said...

@7:58 --

I think several things happened. Poe has been lying to us about the relevant law for weeks, insisting the case was heading for trial. Poe created one excuse after another for the cops and prosecutors. She is a sell-out, no other word for it.

Carol kept her wits about her and countered each lie, with citations to actual law, refusing to buy Poe's BS and responding in a more respectful fashion than Poe deserved. Also, in the meeting and in e-mails, Poe was desperate for Carol to dump her, but Carol wouldn't take the bait. When Carol refused to fire her, Poe essentially concocted a scheme with the prosecutor to fire herself. There are more specifics, and I will get to those in an upcoming post, but those are two key factors.

legalschnauzer said...

DM @7:49 --

You speaketh truth. It takes personal experience with it to grasp that the "justice system" is seedy and broken beyond comprehension.

legalschnauzer said...

@7:37 --

Are you 6:44's stupid twin? We've never "celebrated and hugged" Patty Poe. Carol tried to be hopeful about her and give her the benefit of the doubt, but when Poe proved she wasn't deserving of that, Carol stood up to her -- until Poe saw her con games weren't going to work and now is trying to bail out on her own. A couple of key facts that you and 6:44 apparently can't grasp:

(1) Carol is the party here, not me. She's the one who got her back up when Poe lied to her over and over.

(2) Poe bailed on Carol, not the other way around. Poe got crossways with us, and is trying to exit because she can't manage Carol the way she's been instructed to.

(3) The public despises lawyers, in general, for a reason. Poe is helping her "profession" sink even lower in the public's eyes.

legalschnauzer said...

@7:49 --

It doesn't take much to be a better lawyer than Patty Poe. But a pro se party can only represent himself. Carol and I are married, but that doesn't mean I can represent her in court. She either will represent herself or find a private attorney. Either alternative is better than anything Patty Poe can offer.

Anonymous said...

Pretty obvious that Poe and the prosecutor have been in cahoots for a while now.

Anonymous said...

You seem to have problems with everyone you encounter. Eventually all your relationships seem to sour. Why is that?

At some point, you've gotta look around and say to yourself, "Maybe it's me."

Just some free advice.

legalschnauzer said...

Yes, absolutely. Poe has been representing the other side's interests, certainly not Carol's. Poe "represented" Carol for about five months, and I'd say she probably was legit for the first six weeks or so.

In my view, things started to change when we started asking for discovery. Poe started getting pressure from somewhere, she started dropping lies and excuses on Carol, and Carol didn't fall for it.

Discovery always is a sensitive area in a legal case, especially when the evidence to be revealed poses problems for powerful interests. All of this tells me there is evidence of some really bad stuff involving the cops -- and maybe prosecutors and certain individuals on the outside who were pushing for us to be evicted, but probably did not foresee Carol's arm being broken.

legalschnauzer said...

@8:20 --

Always funny to get "free advice" from an anonymous troll. What a hoot!

If my relationships always sour, why have I been married to the same woman for 28 years? Don't have a comeback for that, do you?

Anonymous said...

If I'm the judge, I'm real pissed off. She's the one who foisted Poe upon Carol, and Poe utterly failed in her obligation to provide vigorous representation. The judge should report Poe to the bar.

Anonymous said...

From a few months ago:

"Public Defender Patty Poe did a cracker-jack job on Carol's behalf."

But now because you aren't getting your way, she is "lying." What an ingrate you are. Carol could be going to jail and Ms Poe has helped to see that won't happen.

Yes, Carol will have a criminal record, but at least you guys will have some commonality now, which is more than your family ever saw in her to start.

legalschnauzer said...

@8:33 --

Is that your big "scoop." I just said Carol tried to be hopeful about Poe and give her benefit of the doubt. Carol still would have that position if Poe had done her job.

Hate to burst your balloon, but Poe has done nothing to help keep Carol from jail. Motions already were filed with the court, and Poe inherited those motions, and could have gotten the whole case dismissed months ago. Carol basically spoon fed the research to her, and Poe spit it up like like an infant.

Poe refused to do the job she signed on for -- and yes, she lied over and over in the process. We've had enough experience with lawyers to have a pretty good idea when one is lying. If you research the actual law in advance, it's not hard to figure it out.

Carol's own intelligence and determination brought about the jail waiver. Patty Poe is just covering her ass. Sad to be that young and already be a sell-out. But that's reality. If Poe eventually goes into private practice, future clients should keep her treatment of Carol in mind.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like today's breaking news in Carol's case has a few trolls upset. Good!

Anonymous said...

Hey not that it matters when you're on PalPal welfare, but were Carol ever to apply as a Walmart greeter would her criminal record show up and make it difficult for her to welcome people into the store?

legalschnauzer said...

@8:52 --

My impression is that a criminal record is not helpful in any job search, as a Wal-Mart greeter or Wall Street CEO. It's particularly difficult when you didn't commit the "crime," -- as I didn't in Alabama and Carol hasn't in Missouri.

As an apparent wise-ass, you seem to think you are above this kind of thing. You might be surprised someday to find out you aren't. When the corrupt cops and lawyers and judges roll up to your door, you might not find all of this so amusing.

Anonymous said...

I try to listen to the advice of people who are trained in the actual subject matter.

I don't tell my accountant how to file my taxes.

I don't tell my lawyer what the law states.

I don't tell my doctor what I read on WebMD.com

You evidently think you can become an expert in everything because you have a dial-up modem and an AOL subscription. If you would humble yourself a bit, things might go better for you.

Related question: When was the last time you told anyone, "I was wrong. I'm sorry." ??

legalschnauzer said...

@9:11 --

This might come as a shock, but "advice" from anonymous trolls isn't as helpful as you might think. Most of us consider the source of information, and if the source doesn't ID himself, we know his advice likely isn't worth a warm cup of spit. Feel free to call, and I'll be happy to discuss. Until then, I have a piece of gum on my shoe that is worth more than your advice.

Anonymous said...

Ah; so like I thought, you haven't told anyone you were wrong maybe since high school. Maybe when one of your brothers held you down and made you cry Uncle.

Anonymous said...

LS:

You mentioned efforts to obtain discovery, and the judge's approval of a motion to compel. What has Carol actually received from the prosecution/cops?

legalschnauzer said...

As of last Monday, Carol had received nothing, other than photos that deputy Harrison took of her injuries and a copy of the 911 call Burrell Health (not me) made to dispatch. That's it. Prosecution has agreed to turn over the following:

(1) All communications between or among Greene County Sheriff's Office regarding eviction -- and this should include communication from anyone outside the sheriff's office;

(2) Statements from any officer present on scene, plus identify of all officers on scene;

(3) Notes or reports re: Carol's injuries from Harrison;

(4) All media -- CAD logs and recordings, dash cam recordings, photos, etc.

Prosecution has been compelled by judge to:

(5) Turn over complaints of excessive force against all officers on scene, from the past three years.

Prosecution has turned over nothing on those five items. And Poe told us last Monday, in so many words, there is nothing she can do to make them turn over discovery.

legalschnauzer said...

@9:35 --

No, like you thought, I invited you to call, and we would discuss. But you are too big a puss to do that, so you resort to putting words in my mouth. Typical troll. Not even creative enough to come up with anything new. Sad.

Anonymous said...

Quit whining like a 10 year old about everyone who is screwing you over. Get a job. Pay your taxes. Contribute to society.

[img]https://media.giphy.com/media/3otPoMSfXVyQHDUeuQ/giphy.gif[/img]

Anonymous said...

@9:35 --

You were invited to call LS, so what's your problem? Can't stand behind your own words? Show us you have a pair and make the call. LS won't bite. I've talked to him on phone before. You're making yourself look terrible. Hell, here's the number -- (205) 381-5673. Make the call, that's my advice.

legalschnauzer said...

@9:56 --

You seem to have the reading comprehension of a gnat. Have you even read the post. Here is key part:

I see these latest developments as a case of almost all good news and very little bad news. The main bad news is that Poe, who came on board in May, cost Carol about five months of time. Also, it means Carol might have to represent herself -- a notion that does not thrill her; but in my view, it's way preferable to having an untrustworthy lawyer, one who has no problem looking you in the eye and lying to your face.

The good news? I see a number of possibilities:

(1) We might land a private attorney, someone who has the smarts and integrity to see this for what it is -- a meaty case that stands to make a difference in the sewer-like justice system of southwest Missouri;

(2) It's nice that Carol no longer is facing possible jail time, but if prosecutors think that is going to encourage her to plead guilty to something she did not do, they had better think again;

(3) Carol's pro se motions, which should have caused the charge to be dropped months ago. might now see the light of day. Poe was blocking them because it was her "opinion" that she did not agree with legal arguments in the motions. Did Poe ever make any citations to law that pointed to problems with the motions? Nope. Will Carol, or her representative, be calling for Palmietto to hear the motions -- or ones similar to them? I sure as heck hope so;

(4) We no longer have to listen to Poe's stale con-woman act. Carol and I have had lawyers lie to us for more than 17 years, over two regions of the country, and we are more than a little tired of it. We also catch onto it pretty quickly. I'm not sure Patty Poe is even 30 years old, so she is awfully young to have already become a sell-out. Perhaps that's the only way she sees to get ahead in the postmodern legal world -- and she might be right about that. But I want no part of her cynical, dishonest, game-playing routine.


How is that whining? I say this is good news, that Poe is doing us a favor, and we consider this good riddance. You read that as whining? SMH

Anonymous said...

If the prosecution isn't turning over discovery, they can be hit with sanctions, held in contempt, be subjected to a subpoena, have their case dismissed.

If Poe doesn't know this, she isn't much of a lawyer. If she does know it and isn't taking action, then she is compromised -- and she's blowing smoke up your fanny.

Either way, this makes her and the PD office look very bad. Something tells me a number of folks have seen the discovery -- dash-cam tapes, CAD logs, emails, texts, etc. -- and it's very bad news for the cops.

Anonymous said...

Poe clearly is trying to protect the cops and prosecutors, but she also might be trying to protect the landlord (Cowherd) and his lawyer (Lowther) and those who have communicated with them. They are the ones who asked for this charade of an eviction to take place. I'm guessing the evidence is not good for Cowherd and Lowther and associates (possibly including your brother).

legalschnauzer said...

@10:11 --

No doubt my brother is in this picture somewhere.

Anonymous said...

You both are gonna have criminal records.

Wards of the State coming to a future near you

legalschnauzer said...

@10:14 --

With each comment, your fear and agitation become more palpable. What are you afraid of? These latest revelations in Carol's case obviously are a threat to you. I wonder why?

Insults are all you've got? Sad.

Anonymous said...

LOL. I knew you'd turn on Poe. This is hilarious. And you'll turn on the next attorney too, that is if one is stupid enough to represent you.

e.a.f. said...

it is not unheard of for P.D. and the prosecutors to work "together" in the interests of saving time, money, future considerations, etc.

If Carol were to accept the "deal" the prosecutors are going to offer and Carol accepted it, she would have a record which may be cause for concern at some future date. this would be especially of concern given how American law works when it comes to "repeat offenders". They may not toss you in jail indefinitely the first time, but over a period of years, should you continue to "be a problem" to those who rule, Carol could find herself declared a habitual offender.

This puts Carol in a difficult situation.

It is interesting, if they weren't going to ask for jail time, why even continue with the case? My sense is they aren't really concerned about Carol suing for damages. Their main interest lies in laying down a track where Carol could wind up in jail. The problem with probation, is if they determine you violated it, you go to jail. As I understand American law, probation officers have a great deal of latitude when it comes to entering your home, without advance notice, can come accompanied by police, etc.

If Carol goes forward and does not accept their offer, even if she were to be sent to jail, she could serve her time and be done with the whole mess. Probation, etc. can bring a whole lot of other problems and control.

Good luck with the case.

e.a.f. said...

A. 9:11 a.m. so you don't tell professionals how to do their jobs. Well an interesting point. when thalidomide babies were being born in Great Britain no one knew what was causing the deformities. The man who figured it out wasn't a medical professional. He was just an regular man whose brother was devastated by the deformities his child was born with. There was no rational so the brother did all the leg work and figured it out.

As to not telling some professionals how to do things, well its why we go for second opinions. Sometimes it really pays off. Gut reactions can be very valuable.

Ever have a house inspector give your home the o.k., purchase it, and find a whole raft a problems? There is more than one lawyer in the U.S.A. and Canada who suggests a person "take the deal" and then the person is exonerated at a later date.

As we used to say, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean its not happening to you.

legalschnauzer said...

@12:08 --

That's ironic. I knew you would show up and demonstrate, once again, that you have the reading comprehension ability of a turnip. Hah!

Anonymous said...

e.a.f,

you aren't nearly as learned and witty as you think you are. your constant fellating of the Shulers makes one wonder what you must do for a living.

Anonymous said...

@1:02, You're just jealous because you aren't being fellated. Maybe you're being filleted?

Anonymous said...

If the prosecutor isn't seeking jail time, then what is he seeking? Why continue with the case?

Anonymous said...

This is all about the discovery. That prosecutors aren't turning it over tells you two things: (1) They have no criminal case against Carol; (2) Carol has one hell of a civil case against them.

Anonymous said...

What 1:53 said. Bingo!

Anonymous said...

I predicted this months ago! I always warn your allies that you will turn on them. And you always do. You’re so predictable, Roger. Poe ran for the exit as soon as she could. You and your wife are nightmare clients, as always. If there’s any justice, Carol will end up with a criminal record.

legalschnauzer said...

@3:12 --

You always "warn my allies that I will turn on them"? Really? Have you ever heard of a civil claim called tortious interference? You are going to be sued for it soon. And I have your digital footprint, so I know who you are. You are going to be sued for a number of other things, too, but thanks for admitting to this one. Have a nice day.

Anonymous said...

Curious - What are the elements of tortious interference that @3:12 will be proven to have committed? What state's tortious interference laws apply in this case?

legalschnauzer said...

@5:24 --

I'd suggest you look it up yourself. You are welcome to call and discuss, but we both know you won't do that. Again, I know who you are -- got the digital footprint that leads straight to your door. And I know where your door is, too.

Since you have such great powers to predict things, you shouldn't even have to look it up. Just "predict" what the law says. Hah!

Anonymous said...

Roger, if you know who people are from their digital footprint, why do you always ask people to call you and brag about how you aren’t scared to use a real name but they must be?

I mean, if a digital footprint IDs someone, then they are being fairly transparent with you, right?

Or maybe poor Miss Poe isn’t the liar. Did you know that most people view others the way they perceive themselves? So who is lying, Roger?

legalschnauzer said...

@7:24 --

It's a fair amount of work to track a digital footprint, so I only do it in certain instances.

Your second paragraph is stupid beyond words. If you break into my house and cops ID you via fingerprints, but you hide out until they arrest your sorry ass, does that mean you are transparent? Being transparent would mean you coming forward and admitting you committed a burglary. But if you don't do that, it just means you are a lousy, no-good thief.

In this instance, checking a digital footprint just means I've done a lot of work. Says nothing about a commenter's transparency.

I looked your digital footprint up a long time ago, and I had help from a friend out west. And that reminds me, you might want to check on tortious interference again. You will be hearing much more about that soon.

Anonymous said...

Roger, you are truly a fucking moron of the first order. Please sue me. PLEASE.

Oh, and shove that “digital footprint” up your wrinkled white ass while you’re at it.

legalschnauzer said...

@9:36 --

Will be happy to sue you, and I look forward to it.

You seem awfully agitated this morning. Didn't sleep well worrying about the "digital footprint"? Good. You have lots of sleepless nights in your immediate future. A friend in Seattle helped me with your digital footprint a long time ago. And it's helpful to see that you are still adding to it.

Not too bright, are we? When we'v dug a hole for ourselves, keep on digging. That strategy always works out well.

legalschnauzer said...

Memo to @11:02 --

You think I'm going to waste my time writing about you? Nobody gives a crap about you. You've lived a wasted, worthless life, accomplishing nothing. And your own actions indicate you know that, and it gnaws at you. You had a chance in your late stages to accomplish something positive, and you blew that -- showing horrible judgment and total lack of a moral compass, siding with corruption over justice.

Your definition of "success" is "how comfortable am I?" You might have comfort but nothing else. Hell, you don't even have comfort because you can't be bothered to clean your mess of a nasty, smelly house. You wallow in filth and bitch about people who have the balls to try to make a difference. With your lack of accomplishment staring you in the face, you go buy another TV (what is that, 12?) or a refrigerator or a lake house -- like a drunk who needs J. Daniels to sooth his pain. Nothing will sooth the pain you've created for yourself, so live with it.

You are a former bureaucrat, afraid of taking a chance, jealous of those who have balls you'll never have. What a miserable waste you are.

e.a.f. said...

A. 1:02 p.m., its e.a.f. I've never proported to be "witty" or 'learned". I'm Canadian.

as to what I do for a living? Omg YOU need to get a grip. In my opinion, when people "lower" themselves to those types of arguments they frequently have nothing better to say or write. If you don't like what this blog posts then why come here?

Although not all of us agree on everything on this blog, we tend to disagree with a bit more decorum.

who ever is having the argument with L.S. regarding digital footprints and lawsuits, you're obviously very unhappy with this blog, so really, why come here? There are so many other blogs who would welcome you and you'd be so much happier there, unless of course you are attempting to try to make others "unhappy". If that is your intent, then first some of us would have to care and really I would suggest most of us don't. My suggestion to L.S.: simply trash future communications from you. You don't add to the discussion.

Anonymous said...

9:36 again. I have emailed everyone who you mention helping you on your blog and I tell them that you are a disloyal, paranoid piece of shit. You going to sue me for telling the truth? Go right ahead! DO IT you coward! You’ve never won a case and you won’t beat me this time either.

Anonymous said...

9:36 one more time. “Digital footprint” doesn’t mean anything. Where do I live? What’s my name? Any idea? You’re not smart enough to know anything!

legalschnauzer said...

If it doesn't mean anything, why are you so worried about it? You keep bringing it up over and over. Bet you won't sleep a wink tonight.

I can tell you this: "Digital footprint" means enough that I can take the information I have to a federal agency, say the FBI, and they can monitor your emails, your texts, your phone calls, and determine if you have been engaged in criminal activity, along with others. Maybe I've already done that. Ever heard of a guy named Robert Mueller, who is looking into Alabama crooks like Jeff Sessions and Luther Strange -- and efforts by Trump and his affiliates to attack journalists?

You are a guppy, but that doesn't mean you can't be caught in the net when the whales go down. And they will be going down. Give it some thought. But don't worry too much. I hear federal prisons are better than those state big houses.

I never said I was smart enough to make this happen. But my friend in Seattle . . . that's a different story -- and you don't really know much about him, do you? He's an effing genius.

legalschnauzer said...

@9:36 --

You don't need to tell me about the emails you've sent. I already know about them. It was real smart of you to put these things in writing. You think my friends don't send me copies of emails like that? Many of my friends have been attacked by much bigger thugs than you, so they are highly sensitive when they see a "guppy thug" attacking me. Heck, I didn't even have to check your digital footprint for this information; it fell in my lap. Can't wait for your next smart move.

BTW, I see you remain clueless about tortious interference. That's typical of a wise-ass who is in way over his head. Such types usually drown.

legalschnauzer said...

So you know: This might not be just a civil matter, like tortious interference. If you've been part of a conspiracy, that can be criminal (obstruction of justice, that kind of thing) -- and your e-mails could be most interesting evidence. Looking forward to your next bright idea.

Why don't you try e-mailing my friend in Seattle. Or, maybe you already have. That was a real moment of inspiration on your part.

You should put in an application at the White House. You would fit right in. You and the Trumpies can all go down together.

9:36 said...

9:36 here. If you have copies of my private correspondence with certain individuals, you are to delete those emails immediately. They are confidential correspondence and NOT for your eyes. This is a legal matter and I will take action against you and your conspirator (wife, Carol), on or about November 22nd. This is a legal instruction and if you fail to act I WILL TAKE LEGAL ACTION against you and your wife and blog.

THIS IS YOUR LAST WARNING MR SHULER. I have very significant resources at my disposal, including a trust fund simply for legal matters, and an entire local law firm that works for me. I also know many people in the state capital and I have a certain someone's mobile number right here in front of me. I would really hate to have to call him and have you arrested again at the motel.

ACT ACCORDINGLY you fucking bottom feeder. I hope you crack a nut next time you fall over.

Winston said...

You don’t have any friends in Seattle. Have you ever met him? Do you know who he works for? No you don’t. Not really. The fact is he is raping you in the ass right guy now. You know what that feels like. So does Carol.

Word to the wise: cancer is a bitch in the ass.

Anonymous said...

really really weird that you are following attractive females on your facebook with whom you are not connected as friends. like stalkerish weird.

Are you masturbating to these women? Does Carol know you follow them?

Examples?

Christie Webb Thomas
Emma Anne


Care to comment?

legalschnauzer said...

My comment is that you are a loon. I'm not FB friends with either one. I hardly follow anyone on FB, unless it's a favorite author or musician. Have no idea how I show as a follower for these two women. I have far better looking women than this pair who are full FB friends.

Keep grasping at straws, dude.

legalschnauzer said...

Winston --

You sound like a class act. Why so upset?

legalschnauzer said...

@6:28 --

What you sent belongs to me now, bub. And it has been shared with the FBI. You have no confidentiality when you are engaging in civil wrongs and criminal acts. Tough luck for you. Don't expect me to cover for your own stupidity.

Anonymous said...

Here's how it happens:

You sent Christie Webb Thomas a friend request because she looked hot in her profile picture. She checked out your profile, realized you are a sex-obsessed psycho, and did not accept the invitation.

You sent Emma Anne a friend request because she looked hot in her profile picture. She checked out your profile, realized you are a sex-obsessed psycho, and did not accept the invitation.

On Facebook, with non-celebrity pages, when you send a facebook friend request, it automatically follows them. So of course you have other hot women as your friends. You have thousands of friends. People with thousands of friends are usually the sendor, not the sendee. Many hot women obviously accepted your request even though you don't know them. In fact you have many more women friends than men, and you clearly don't know most of them.

Just really weird behavior. Creepy.

Winston said...

I own those letters by copyright, Mr Shuler. Delete them at once and state clearly that you have deleted them. You do not have my permission to give copies to the FBI or anyone else!

You are about to be legally buggered, Shuler. I know you were buggered in jail a few times. Remember what you learned then: you can’t beat us, so learn to love it. Stop fighting back, you fake news fucker.

Has it come out yet that Carol threw herself down a flight of stairs once to abort your baby? Man I wish your mom had aborted you back in 1912.

Shrimp on the Barbie!!!

legalschnauzer said...

Winston:

You copyright your emails? Hah! I see no copyright notice on the emails I have. If you want to send me copies with such a notice, feel free. Or you can call, and we will discuss.

Given that your emails indicate your involvement in unlawful, even criminal, behavior, I'd say you are in a tight squeeze.

BTW, adding 4-letter words, doesn't help your argument. Just shows you are a desperate fool with limited vocabulary

legalschnauzer said...

@2:40 --

Sounds like you are jealous because I have a lot of FB friends. What's creepy is that someone like you has nothing better to do than to check my FB page and concoct fantasies about attractive women there -- many of whom sought out friendship with me, and also are friends with my wife.

Keep barking up the tree, nut job.

Anonymous said...

2:40,


You have no idea how FB following works, and you are a creepy, pathetic sack of shit, to boot.

Here is what really happened, and I know, because I've had it happen to me.

A friend of Roger's sent a suggestion that he befriend this person. Without even looking or thinking about it, Roger OK'd the suggestion and wound up as this "person's" follower. There's a good chance the person Roger is following is not even a person. How do you seek out friendship with an FB bot, someone who probably isn't real? You can't. It happened because Roger likely has a few trolls among his almost 4,000 FB friends, and one of them pulled this stunt in an effort to be clever.

That you have nothing better to do than to track this down and create a false narrative about it tells me you are a super-duper loser. Pathetic. Grow up.

My suggestion to Roger is to be more careful about accepting friend suggestions.

I also am an active progressive, and I have a lot of FB friends, and I've had the same stunt pulled on me. I've learned to periodically check my followers and eliminate those I don't really want to follow. You probably don't have this problem because you have few friends, and no one gives a shit about you.

For the record, I checked Roger's followers, too, and almost all of them are public figures -- journalists, authors, musicians, etc. People of substance, unlike you.