In a comment at 22:29 EDT on July 2, 2016 at Billy Sez…
If you ever had children, Jane, assuming you could find a man willing to touch you, I would be only too happy to urinate on them. With you as their mother, it would be the best thing to ever happen to them. At least the water would be warm.
Bill Schmalfedt will deny it until put under oath. Because Bill Schmalfeldt is a shit-sniffing, turdrolling, toddlerstalking, liar, and I have 100% incontrovertible proof.
He can weep and beg and demand to see it like the sand-packed pussy he is. Someone else may show him, because I’m not the only one with the proof. But I guarantee-damn-tee that I will release it at a moment of maximum personal advantage to me, and there is nothing anyone can do about it.
There seems to be a great deal of pointage, laughery and mockification out there in all corners about my pending lawsuit to be dismissed in the US District court for the Northern District of Illinois. People who haven’t (and won’t) even be named as defendants are writing blog posts pointing out my misunderstandings of the law, the fact that I do not know which rules are controlling in the jurisdiction, and that I still haven’t read the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure past a point where I see something I like. They are also pointing out that I STILL DON’T GET that once a suit is dismissed with prejudice, any allegation that was made OR THAT COULD HAVE BEEN MADE in that lawsuit is now barred by res judicata. My current FAILSUIT against Grady is loaded with false allegations against Grady that I cannot prove, and therefore will not be litigated at all.
Any party in the case of Schmalfeldt v (don’t forget the GS-13 Oxford comma!), Grady et al, in the U.S. (wait…does the GS-13 Stylebook call for “U.S.” as is shown here, or “US” like the previous paragraph? Let’s look it up! flip, flip, flip.. ah! Here it is: “We’re the US Government – fuck you and your illU.S.ions of consistency!” Well, okay then.) District Court for the Northern District of the Central Division of the National League of Major League Baseball, any rebroadcast, retransmission, or account of this post, without the express written consent of Major League Baseball, is prohibited.
Where was I?
Oh yeah…Case #1:16-cv-7150, should address their concerns about the case to Michael Sorich, Esq., the poor luckless bastard who drew the short straw at the Cavanagh (GS13 proofreading powers – oh, fuckit!) Law Group and wound up saddled with this stillbirth of a complaint. It is not incumbent on me to answer to or address misstatements of law made by defendants (named or yet to be named) in the case. But you know I will because I just can’t help myself. Call it Parkinson’s Dementia (which I don’t have)
or poor impulse control (which I also don’t have…poor impulse control would be a huge step up from the ABSOLUTE ZERO IMPULSE CONTROL that I actually have), eventually I’m going to not talk this case to death, all the while claiming that I actually am saying nothing (insert useful phrase here) about the case.
Which would be a true statement with the proper addition of the useful phrase “helpful to my attorney.” I am merely providing my barely literate target audience (that’s YOU, Fifi!) with misinformation that will make me look sillier than usual (Dear Old Dad’s First Rule of Holes: KEEP DIGGING!) when I am yet again proven to be incorrect.
Again, my advice to everyone is Pointage, Laughery and Mockification. It never fails. Don’t overthink anything. In fact, don’t think at all.
I never do.
There are currently two defendants in the case. There may be more, unless I take my bitch attorney’s advice. If there are, you can bet that my soon to be former slave lawyer tossed me into the street with some really good advice to get off the internet and don’t be such a fucking asshole, after which I paid the filing fee myself and added defendants who continue to hurt my butt.
That $400 would have bought a lot of ointment.
res judicata doesn’t apply because I am not alleging anything that I was so stupid that I dismissed with prejudice last year. This time, I made a whole different batch of mistakes, such as [REDACTED – WE DO NOT EDUCATE THE MONKEY, EVEN THOUGH IT’S TOO LATE – PK]. Plus, the ever-present and inescapable fatal flaw is still ever-present and inescapable, so there’s that.
There will be an initial status hearing on September 29, provided my ethically constrained attorney has not done something ethical.
I understand the nervousness and anxiety. I’ve lost six previous lawsuits without getting past a motion to dismiss because I’m an idiot who cannot be educated. But this will be different, because I’m going to convince a former prosecutor that I’m perfectly sane, and that nine restraining orders in five states were all granted on account of lies about me posting things on the internet that only exist on my hard drive as far as I know. But I never delete anything…and you can trust me on that. I’m not saying I don’t have cause to be nervous or anxious, because with my history on the internet there is no way on Earth I’m going to convince a jury of reasonable people that defendants I have been harassing for only two years are responsible for some of the vile stuff that I have been writing for the last eight years. My so-called “sterling reputation” was falling apart long before I conned my way into getting that “experimental” surgery. I’m just saying…
Chill. Lawyer up if you are dumb enough to believe that my attorney is going to agree that this complaint isn’t two quarts of Slovenian horseshit in a one quart Tupperware. And remember, this has been four years in the making (three of which are barred by res judicata). What will be will be…the same thing that has always been…
Pointless, but worthy of pointage. Unfunny, but laughable. And oh, so mockworthy.
Loosen up your lulz muscles. Buy moar popcorn. Find a comfy spot.
In a recent, soon-to-be-deleted post archived here, a DUMBFUCK tries to sound intelligent when writing:
To establish a negligent spoliation claim in Illinois, a plaintiff needs to prove that: 1) the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty to preserve the evidence; 2) the defendant breached its duty; 3) the loss of the evidence was the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s inability to prove claims in an underlying lawsuit; and 4) as a result, the plaintiff suffered actual damages. As is set forth in Martin, the general rule in Illinois is that there is no duty to preserve evidence. Thus, in order to pursue a spoliation claim, the plaintiff needs to establish an exception to the general rule. To establish an exception to the “no duty” rule, a plaintiff must meet a two-part test. The first part, the “relationship” part, requires that the plaintiff show an agreement, contract, statute, special circumstance, or voluntary undertaking that imposed a duty on the defendant to preserve the evidence at issue. The second part, the “foreseeability” part, requires a plaintiff to show that the duty extends to the specific evidence at issue by showing that a “reasonable person in the defendant’s position should have foreseen that the evidence was material to the potential civil action.”
And DUMBFUCK succeeds.
At sounding intelligent. But not at BEING intelligent.
If I wanted to look at a textbook freak out meltdown, I’d read the archived tweets from when you sent yourself a Tupperware full of horse poop, or when the letter you forgot you sent to John showed up.
I have reasons to suspect that William M. Schmalfeldt may have been abused by its father.
I have no proof. Just suspicions.
I know its wife would rather be dead than with it in his St. Francis, WI, apartment Manatee Cave.
God only knows what went on when The BLOB’s father went into his sons’ bedrooms to tuck them in at night. Both of them are grown up now (though one is dead as a doornail – one word). Both grew up idiots and were empowered to sleep with sit on the laps of brutal men like their father. Is that a clue? I have no idea.
But we don’t need to have evidence, do we? William M. Schmalfeldt has been referring to people as having committed the most loathsome of crimes. Is it projecting?
William M. Schmalfeldt writes a lot about child sexual abusers, the things they know, the way they act. Is it speaking from experience?
Its wife lives in another kingdom half a planet away from it, though she speaks to it through its clock urn and occasionally from “Mother Mammary” clouds. Its children were hidden from it by its ex-wives so it could not pee on them, no matter what its motivation.
And William sits in its Manatee Cave, drunk, deranged, demented and depraved (and in default, don’t disregard!) having tantrums about everything (one word) written about it on every other blog but its own.
The internet enables this drunken, deranged, demented, depraved, defaulted, and depressed loser by giving it space to blog. This is after William M. Schmalfeldt was kicked off every blog ever fouled by its presence.
William M. Schmalfeldt is a tormented man who I suspect may be agonizing over the memory of having abused peed on its now abandoned children. The only way it can deal with its own crimes against nature, against society, against the fabric of its family (in my opinion) is to project its actual crimes onto someone it’s never met, it doesn’t know, and then lash out at that person as a way of self-flagellation.
If the St. Francis nuns were “in the know” property owners, they would stop enabling William M. Schmalfeldt’s cyberstalking and harassment. But the St. Francis nuns are not privy to DUMBFUCK’s child stalking, to his (in my opinion) child pron, to his diminished capacity LOLsuits and to his 9 restraining orders in 5 states (if not more). Therefore, it serves its purpose to generate controversy, no matter how false the narrative, no matter how twisted, sick and crazy the person telling the story.
(I know, sometimes I just stop writing right in the middle of my screed because, *hic*, it’s time for another. Come hither, my little palsy-walsy. I’ve only had half the bottle.)