ok i will verbatim,attempt to walk you thru.and tina is here with us today!
(helping her as much as i can paul.)
Now:before she arrive, earlier,the attorney has call me. (before her)so odd.
but he in a nutshell,ask me if i am "understanding that"since he did not at all sign a agreement for such "lawyer representation with the court"and since she did,"this did not mean he took her case,and her child lawsuit case involving CPS!"Is he right paul?
he then say,"I did not have all of the facts,to base a fair conclusion" on if
"yes or no"if tina has a "real claim to sue"and how it should be written up
etc.if she did have a claim!!!
So paul.i just literally laugh,because i am saying to this "attorney"but your
draft,clearly is written per "count"and cause of action,so what am i not
seeing her counsel.and his response; Heather-Marie,i really don't think so,at "this point"because i did not know"1"substantiated,of excessive corporal punishment was against her!(and upheld 2x by a appeal judge!)
I said,but your email back and forth with "tina"demonstrate the complete
antithesis,whereas; your saying to her,your understanding all of this and
your even commenting on having to acknowledge,there was yet 1 finding
of corporal punishment,or as appeal say,1 incident of abuse & neglect
by "Excessive use of corporal punishment " so why are you now attempt
to say your not"aware"of this finding,on the record!
BOB GOT SO QUIET PAUL.
Then i encompass:
There is no way your seeing the withheld evidence; i.e. pix,showing no abuse!(in the SAME location where child was allege to be so brutally beaten,withheld by CPS!
There was a internal report(s)showing caseworker never was even able to prove child abuse,even complimenting the primary caretaker(mom!)
and her home.
There is a police dept.(supplemental report)exhibit,"another worker, for DYFS,DCCP adage,"we can't prove abuse assault complaint at this time but "will keep cops posted"if warranted.
So i told him,"You either did not read this,did NOT provide diligence,with so much evidence she share with you,and LIED to her misleading her to think your reviewing her email file,OR "your lieing about" what your train
in,as a "personal injury lawyer"with sex abuse,and other claims re:CPS.
He was so quiet paul,and only ending it with,"Well,that is all i have to say today since i know your helping her"with emotional support,and legal research etc. heather,and he say,"but i m goin to inform her to day i can't
re-consider"i "had a headache"ALL last week over this,and i told him,
and HOW DO U THINK TINA FEEL, your making her go to the E.R. for chest pains,and she has No history,in her early forties of such until you shock her by quitting the case,your promising her to represent her,even provided a draft,as with your name on it,sir.That is nefarious to do to her
and i am glad she will be suing you then and i just hung up on him.
i await your full response to his points raised.
BTW:(by the way)
tina then hear from him
and he essentially cited almost the same,but with her was"actually"he turn on her,NOW saying,'well how do you expect me!"(YELL AT HER)
to represent, you when i did not "See"nor have all facts like the 1 finding?
But again paul,he is telling her lies,he KNEW because her paper trail
via email and fax,demonstrate he knew from her since day 1 a finding did exist,
BUT HE IS IGNORING the most significance as i told him and her:
1. Appeal said(1)finding was NOT enough i.e. spanking etc. to keep a child from her own parent,and state"cps"agency MUST hence,have other serious allegations in order to NOT reunite parent,and child. paul.
DYFS ,DCCP for five years knew this and IGNORE each appeal ruling
until 2010 or so or 2011 clearing the parent of"all additional allegations"
by this time the child was already home same year mom was cleared.
alot to read,so take your time,and again atty.is ONLY i told him focus
on the"spanking ISOLATED 1x incident"and he is again saying how the
"appeal has spoken"but yet the appeal are the ones who said,dyfs has
to investigate,either prove "a danger to mom"or not etc. if not the child it say can NO LONGER BE DEPRIVE, and also adding"importantly the nj parent"because the "un-investigated allegations" continue to "Darken"and cloud the record,and,affect the"Constitutoinal Right'of tina the parent.
THAT IS WHAT you see paul,he is not focusing on.
as a result,sadly "the child was brutally assaulted,repeatedly"
but he is not"Seeing this"but yet his draft make it appear he did.
i await your urgent CLEAR feedback
and HE KNOW HE IS NOW RISKING BEING SUED.
LASTLY:she told him,i am still going to either file my own suit,but with YOUR draft attach,with your name on it,and he told her, "GO AHEAD"she