|
From Bradbury Township Mille Lacs County, Minnesota |
Mille Lacs News Since 4/18/07
|
 |
||
|
|
Monday April 19, 2010 |
|||
|
|
The Law Suits Defending My Life Series
|
Please Contribute to Hannabelle's Legal Aid Fund
|
||
|
Home
__________________
Court Documents Freeman/D'Angelo Appellant's Reply Brief Freeman/D'Angelo Summons and Complaint Freeman/D'Angelo Motion to Dismiss the Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Affidavit in Nexus Case
the Anti-SLAPP Law Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation 554.02 PROTECTION OF CITIZENS TO PARTICIPATE IN GOVERNMENT 554.04 FEES AND DAMAGES.
|
The Minnesota Justice System - Making a Bad First Impression
(Part 1) - District Court by Hannabelle Mille Lacs News Staff Writer January 22, 2010 II probably should have checked with my neighbors, you know - asked their advice and input before embarking on my long, arduous journey through the Minnesota Judicial System. After all - 94 of my neighbors are convicted sex offenders who've had plenty of courtroom experience - and they aren't even eighteen years old yet. I, on the other hand have somehow managed to make it for fifty-five years without landing in any trouble. Now I am the defendant in not one but TWO lawsuits brought about by - well, those who brought the sex offenders into our neighborhood in the first place. Is it any wonder I didn't ask them for their expertise? They are the ones out to crucify me. By now, however, I've had enough experience of my own to feel comfortable sharing my first impressions of Minnesota Justice. Now, occasionally I've been criticized as "blasting" anyone who doesn't agree with me - and since nobody has agreed with me in either the Hennepin District Court or the Minnesota Court of Appeals, one might think now's the time for Hannabelle to fly into a rage. Sorry to disappoint. Believe me. I know what it means to be disappointed. Judge Susan Burke - Freeman/D'Angelo Case Motion to Dismiss
She kept us waiting about twenty minutes before she finally arrived. She started by saying she had only had time to glance at the documents we had provided and had not read them thoroughly. During my lawyer's ten minute presentation, she kept looking at her watch and interrupting him, asking him to hurry because she had somewhere she needed to go. This is my day in court? Really? Then she blasted me for stating that the FBI was investigating. The FBI was investigating! Does she think I just sit at my computer making things up because I think its funny? Well, apparently so. Plaintiffs' lawyer Victor Lund told her he thinks I do. (And Vic knows me so well.....like we're sooo sympatico.) After a few minutes, it was all over. Judge Burke then took a moment to oh-by-the-way-us that she happened to have a "conflict of interest" and did we want her to recuse herself? Yes, we did. After dealing with the Onamia town council for the past three years, I am totally opposed to conflicts of interest. Am I the only one who doesn't have one? So besides the two hour trip (one way) we struggled through rush hour to get to court at the crack of dawn, or at least the crack of 8:30 a.m. for the 9:30 appointment we didn't want to be late for, it was a total waste of everyone's time, Even in the backwoods of Nexusville, we have telephones. Perhaps Judge Burke doesn't know that lawyers charge by the hour. This is my life. That was Judge Burke. Mrs. Burke. (Not to confuse her with her husband, who is also a judge.) Judge Marilyn Rosenbaum - Freeman/D'Angelo Case Motion to Dismiss
This judge glared at me as if I'd done committed the most dastardly crime of the century - and of course I had. I called Jim D'Angelo, the CEO of a corporation "Poopsie" after all. Shame on me. During the proceedings, she admonished my lawyer and told him to admonish me because I had committed another crime. Yes. I got busted for "wiggling" and "frowning". We can't have any of that in court, no matter how bad your back hurts. In fact, one of my lawyers told me he thought my wiggling actually hurt my case. Could that be true? I doubt it. I think it was more likely because I was too fat. Or too tall. Or had a bad hair day. Certainly a judge would only consider the law and not be counting how many times I frowned while some Plaintiffs' lawyer told lies about me, assassinated my character and told the judge I just sit at my computer and make things up because I think its funny. Its okay for him to testify? I thought he was the lawyer, not the witness! And don't cut me any slack because I'm sick and suffer from chronic pain and it is very hard for me to sit still even on a good day, Judge Rosenbaum. This was not a good day. But hey, this isn't Court T.V. This is REAL court. Of course I lost my Motion to Dismiss. No surprise since the judge had me pegged as some kind of "gadfly" who just thrives on all this attention and needs to be punished. Where'd she get that idea? From Victor Lund, of course. While my brilliant lawyer argued the law, and with such eloquent logic, Victor hurled one personal attack at me after another. You'd think that instead of peacefully and legally applying my First Amendment Rights - seeking to procure favorable government action to keep sex offenders away from day-care and little old ladies, that I had grabbed a shot-gun and wiped out the town council over a parking ticket. But that's the way the cookie crumbles. I lost. Besides there being no wiggle room in the courtroom, there was also no wiggle room in that woman's brain. Her limited scope made it impossible to imagine that one can use the Internet to influence the government. She ruled that since I used the Internet, I was not actually seeking to procure favorable government action. Now, before you go and say, "How dumb can she be? She's a JUDGE for Pete's sake!" let me remind you she was appointed by a Republican governor - and that not everyone knows how to operate a computer or plays Bejeweled online or knows that Sarah Palin's Facebook page is notoriously popular with the Right-wing Christies or that people actually use the Internet to influence our government. My own Congresswoman told me that she reads Hannabelle. I know for a fact that I reached people on the town council because they're pissed off as hell with me. But Judge Rosenbaum declared: "The SLAPP law is to be used as a shield, not as a sword." That doesn't even make sense. She means that I can't tell the truth if the truth is unpleasant, as it is in this case? I can't call a spade a spade? I have no freedom of opinion and no freedom to express that opinion? Isn't it possible that they are wrong and I am right? What a concept. But the Anti-SLAPP law is to be used as a shield for citizen activists like me to protect me from the corporate sword of a harassment lawsuit. This is my life. That was Judge Rosenbaum. Mrs. Rosenbaum (Not to confuse her with her husband, who is also also a judge.)
Judge John Sommerville - Nexus Motion to Dismiss Here, I didn't get my day in court at all. I got my day in the judge's chambers. To my knowledge, there was no court reporter present, which would mean, of course, no transcript. No record. (That is, unless you count mine. Thank goodness I keep copious notes.) Ahhh. They're so casual with my life, aren't they? The day in Sommerville's backroom was so strange that you'll have to wait for the book for all the details. But imagine a judge in a pink polo shirt sitting behind a desk in a dimly-lit room, two lawyers in front of him with a group of my supporters behind the lawyers. Its show time! It's the Judge John Show. At one point, the judge was laughing and joking with the lawyers, calling each other names. Judge Sommerville says to my lawyer, "I could call you a child molester." My lawyer says, "I'd say Victor Lund is getting away with murder right now." (My lawyer makes me proud. Its not his fault we keep losing. Victor cheats.) Anyway, Sommerville told us a lot about his life, which might have been interesting except that - and I don't want to sound self-centered but - I thought this was about me. It did sound as if we'd established that I was NOT GUILTY of defamation, indeed I hadn't said anything half as bad as what's said on the Rachel Maddow Show or Bill O'Reilly. We definitely established that Nexus suffered no damages. We also established that I'd been seeking to procure favorable government action... So I won, right? But... This judge ruled against me too. Judge Sommerville thinks that the Constitutionality of the Anti-SLAPP law might be questionable because it interferes with the Due Process of Nexus' right to jury trial. Again, Nexus has rights. I don't. I'm just a little gadfly. I'm not a big sensitive corporation whose feelings were hurt. This is my life. That was Judge Sommerville. (I don't know if he's married to a judge, but considering the first two judges, maybe its a prerequisite? A little nepotism in the Minnesota court system?)
If the District Court ruled in my favor, the judges would be putting themselves on the hot seat
because my Anti-SLAPP Motions to Dismiss are cases of first impression.
Nothing like Hannabelle's cases have ever gone before the Minnesota Courts before.
If the judges deny my Motion to Dismiss under the Anti-SLAPP Law I get sent to jury trials and the juries will decide, not the judges.
Its a lot easier for them, personally to send me to jury trials. Then they don't have to THINK about it. They don't have to commit to a decision. This is MY first impression of the Justice System. I find it very disturbing. So should you.
This isn't about me. It isn't about supposed defamation. It isn't even about Nexus. Its about the judges - and their political goals of getting re-elected.
Hannabelle wasn't born yesterday.
|
The Mille Lacs News an independent online news source. Bringing you information about the war between Bradbury Township citizens and the City of Onamia over the fate of a residential neighborhood and the sex offenders of the Nexus Corporation
|
||
|
The Plaintiffs Jim D'Angelo Peter D. Freeman The Defendant "Hannabelle"
Daniel Webster
"There is no happiness, there is no liberty,
there is no enjoyment of life, unless a man can say, when he rises in the
morning, I shall be subject to the decision of no unwise judge today."
Much Ado
About Nothing
Why is it that I am judged a liar based simply on the fact that I made a
statement?
|
||||
|
|
|||
|
