septic system, blog post by John Hoff
In addition to her crazy blog "Jill Clark Speaks," everybody's favorite suspended attorney with spectacular mental health issues has another blog entitled "Prosecutorial Misconduct in America."
Often material in the two blogs will boringly overlap, as happened early today when Clark published some crazy stuff about how she was going to "grant immunity" to (and I quote) "everybody."
Check out this latest lunacy...
Clark writes as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------
I granted immunity to everybody at 12:41 a.m. this morning, 2/9/13.
That grant of immunity was based on agreed-upon settlement terms: agreement to a consent decree.
I am willing to make another grant of immunity at this time, for conduct that occurred since the last grant. But that grant will be based on an agreement to cease and desist (conduct already agreed would be ceased) and the equipment must be delinked/picked up (that’s not an invitation to enter my house,by the way; if you have something here post a comment and arrangements will be made).
This offer will remain open for one hour.
And anyone selling digital data comprising or from “Songs for a Recovering Planet” or the new CD’s, must cease and desist within one hour as well.
----------------------
My goodness, what was I doing at 12:41 a.m this morning?Think, Johnny, THINK!!! Your precious Clarkian immunity may DEPEND on this!! Were you behaving yourself, Johnny?
Or beaming evil thoughts at Jill Clark's medulla oblongata?
OK, wait, I think I know where I was!
Oh, yeah, I was listening to some videos on YouTube. In fact, I'm almost certain it was Lawyers, Guns and Money by Warren Zevon because I listened to it over and over in various versions right before I went to bed.
What could this odd coincidence MEAN, I wonder?
Is it some kind of MESSAGE for Jill Clark? (Eyebrows quirked upright, face in the grim "could it all be a conspiracy?" expression)
Speaking just for myself, Jilly Doodle Doo, I don't want immunity. I want a pony. I want a magical pony that can read my mind when I attach nerve endings from my butt bone into his pony brain, kind of like the creatures on that movie Avatar. I would like my magic flying pony (yes, he can fly!) to be silver, if possible, but gold will work just as well. Just so long as it's one of the colors of spray paint that has a lot of acetone and is good for huffing.
I also want World Peace and some tacos with extra sour cream.
Anyway, it appears Clark has been doing a kind of "document dump" on the Prosecutorial Misconduct blog. In fact, she's publishing so many documents that somebody wrote me an email and asked something like, "Why is she publishing that stuff? Some of it appears to actually be harmful to cases and clients." Or words to that effect.
Ever willing to be an armchair psychiatrist to Clark or anybody else, I offered my answer as follows:
Well, she's throwing EVERYTHING out there. Vomiting it up for the archives of the ages. "Here is my whole damn life, all I am."
Well, some of the documents Jill Clark published on her blog include interesting behind-the-scenes info about Moore v. Hoff, a lawsuit filed against this blogger for "defamation" which wasn't defamation at all, but the ugly truth. The verdict by the Minnesota Court of Appeals received publicity all over America.
Most of my regular readers are familiar with the case. But these documents shed new light on what we THOUGHT we knew.
1.) Click here for a letter from the lawyer for City Pages responding to a "demand for retraction" by Jill Clark on behalf of Jerry Moore, who was involved with the mortgage fraud at 1564 Hillside Ave. N. The letter says, in summary, we're not printing a retraction because everything we published is true or included in a "privilege" to publish allegations contained in official documents.
Here is my favorite portion of the letter:
Your letter complained that the articles stated Mr. Moore was "involved" in the fraudulent purchase of real property located at 1564 Hillside Avenue in Minneapolis. Yet, as a matter of fact, the seller, Keith Reitman, confirms that Mr. Moore was paid $5,000 in that transaction as a fee for Moore introducing him to Ms. Snoddy. Snoddy, of course, has been indicted as part of the fraud and, according to Reitman, she was Moore's girlfiend.
You really have to wonder why Clark would publish this letter on her blog. The publication of this letter appears to be against the interests of her client, Jerry Moore, in a way that is blatant and obvious. As is so often the case, you have to wonder, "What was Clark thinking?"
Well, the State Supreme Court thinks she has mental problems. I concur. And her clients pay the price. But here's a new way they pay the price, with Clark not having enough sense to avoid hanging out all the dirty laundry on the legal laundry line.
2.) Click here for Clark's response to the letter from the City Pages lawyer. Once again I will just highlight my favorite parts. Clark airs a theory that Andy Mannix may be "working" for me, John Hoff. And she goes out of her way to mention that City Pages named The Adventures of Johnny Northside best city blog.
Though arguably less harmful than the first letter, I still don't see how the publication of this letter is in the interest of Clark's client, Jerry Moore, who is likely to be further humiliated and made even more infamous by such documents.
3.) Here's a third document which is an affidavit about Don Allen, habitually described by this blogger as a "shakedown artist" with dubious writing and research skills. If it were possible to make Don Allen look like even more of a Judas Iscariot back stabber, well, this document would do just that.
How glad I am to be the one who stood on principal instead trying to hide nickels between my ass cheeks.
And how exciting it is to see Clark blogging again! LET IT RAIN CRAZY!!!!
6 comments:
Here is my favorite portion of the letter to Jill Clark from the lawyer representing City Pages:
"Similarly, City Pages' report of "allegations of misspending" while Moore held the public job of executive director for JACC was based upon an audit and discussions at a public meeting. Readers can judge for themselves whether late night expenditures at a bar and snack expenses at a Perkins really constituted "prostate screening." Certainly you do not contend that use of phrase "wild spending" in this context is actionable?
The presence of the phrases "prostate exam" and "wild spending" in adjacent sentences allows the astute connoisseur of words to experience a delight of paragraph construction not often experienced.
Yeah, it's like the lawyer is just MESSING WITH HER at that point.
And she went and put all this stuff on the internet. As if Jerry Moore needed yet more documentation about that wild night at Gabby's, the drinks, the snacks, the fun, the prostate screening event that became a LEGEND.
Messing with the allegedly claimed prostate examinee too. I bet Jerry might need to google to figure out the joke.
Well, what she said was that she granted immunity to everybody. So if she did that, its been done. Nothing left for us (everybody) to do but enjoy our immunity. Whatever that is worth (nothing).
Have you seen the latest bizarre post on her blog? Something about granting immunity for violations of " section 1" with no explanation of what it is. Then repeated posts that the time is ticking and she has not received any emails....yet there is no option available to comment to contact her. Wtf?
I thought it was just ME. Recently I was looking at her blog and I wanted to submit a comment along the lines of, "Hey, Loony Toons. Would you mind explaining what you mean by Section 1 and these alleged grants of immunity and so forth?"
But I couldn't find the comment function. I looked and looked and thought, what the heck? It was here before. I guess I got distracted and forgot about it but, yeah, the comment function isn't there and here she is begging for people to give her feedback. It's sad and weird.
Post a Comment