Yale F. Edeiken ESQ. iIs In Deep Trouble!
Beaver Cleaver
^^^^^^
That is Pennsylvania Code!!
Rule 3.4. Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel.
A lawyer shall not:
(a) unlawfully obstruct another party’s access to evidence or unlawfully
alter, destroy or conceal a document or other material having potential
evidentiary value or assist another person to do any such act;
(b) falsify evidence,
Comment:
The procedure of the adversary system contemplates that the evidence in a
case is to be marshalled competitively by the contending parties. Fair
competition in the adversary system is secured by prohibitions against
destruction or concealment of evidence, improperly influencing witnesses,
obstructive tactics in discovery procedure, and the like.
Documents and other items of evidence are often essential to establish a
claim or defense. Subject to evidentiary privileges, the right of an opposing
party, including the government, to obtain evidence through discovery or
subpoena is an important procedural right. The exercise of that right can be
frustrated if relevant material is altered, concealed or destroyed. Applicable
law in many jurisdictions makes it an offense to destroy material for purpose of
impairing its availability in a pending proceeding or one whose commencement can
be foreseen. Falsifying evidence is also generally a criminal offense. Paragraph
(a) applies to evidentiary material generally, including computerized
information.
<END>
Yale never served his complaints and he falsified evidence which is condemned
with: "Falsifying evidence is also generally a criminal offense. Paragraph (a)
applies to evidentiary material generally, including computerized information."
I.E.
>Archive/File: people/b/bradbury.scott/Edeiken-v-Bradbury.C1
>Last-Modified: 2001/02/15
>
>IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF LEHIGH COUNTY
>
>CIVIL DIVISION -- LAW
>
>YALE F. EDEIKEN :
> :
>Plaintiff :
> :
>vs. : No. 99-C- 2786
> :
>
>SCOTT BRADBURY
> 24. That on December 5, 1998, Defendant sent Plaintiff an
>electronic communication stating in pertinent part:
>"You only want to blow Joe
>You want to suck Joe's Aryan cock, don't you Yale?
> Doc Tavish"
> Said telephonic communication is attached hereto and made part
>hereof as Exhibit "A-1."
PROOF THE ABOVE SWORN STATEMENT IS PERJURED:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=1201801624195636%40unribbed.net&rnum=1
(Archived locally as: A-1Not1 and A-1Not2)
From: earlt...@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: Vapor, Fatelvis, Bull Conner & B9Predator. Prepare for the worst.
Date: 1999/01/08
Message-ID: <12018016...@unribbed.net>#1/1
X-Trace: news.rdc1.ct.home.com 915759892 24.65.203.77
(Thu, 07 Jan 1999 17:44:52 PDT)
Organization: @Home Network Canada
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1999 17:44:52 PDT
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american,alt.flame.niggers
X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net
> From: ya...@enter.net (Yale F. Edeiken)
> Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
> Subject: Re: PIN JOE DOWN AND SUCK HIS COCK
> > Isn't strange that Yale has only two little harmless posts to offer
> >in his insane attempts to slander?
>
> If they are harmless why are your associates so upset. Indeed you
> admit that. If they were "harmless" they could not be "slander" (they
> aren't, of course).
>
> > REMEMBER: THEY ONLY SMEAR THE ONES THEY FEAR.
>
> But I neither fear you or smear you.
you only want to blow joe
you want to suck joes aryan cock dont you yale
~~End of Exact GOOGLE Archive~~
Not sent by me, not signed "Doc Tavish" and it's from a regular ISP too!
That is perjury submitting falsified evidence!
> 31 That on December 6, 1998, Defendant sent Plaintiff an
>electronic communication stating in pertinent part:
>
> "So why do you still want to suck his cock?
>Do you think you'll become a man by ingesting his manhood?
>
> Doc Tavish"
PROOF THE ABOVE SWORN STATEMENT IS PERJURED:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=0901801802535739%40hexer.org&output=gplain
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=0901801802535739%40hexer.org
(Archived locally as: A-7Not1 and A-7Not2)
From: Laz <hell...@home.com>
Subject: I'm targeted for what? damn.
Date: 1999/01/05
Message-ID: <09018018...@hexer.org>#1/1
X-Trace: news.rdc1.ct.home.com 915502345 24.2.101.226 (Mon, 04 Jan 1999 18:12:25
PDT)
Organization: @Home Network
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 18:12:25 PDT
Newsgroups: alt.skinheads
X-Complaints-To: ab...@home.net
> It is now 8 days since this lying nazi bragged that he would have my
> service with enter.net discontinued.
>
> My e-mail address is still ya...@enter.net,
>
> He is still a nazi.
>
> He is still a liar.
>
> He is still a punk.
>
>
> --YFE
so why do you still want to suck his cock
do you think you'll become a man by ingesting his manhood
~~End of Exact GOOGLE Archive~~
Yale got the author and date wrong too and the post was not signed
Doc Tavish as he claimed in his perjured statement. I also never had
an account at the regular ISP used either! CRIMINAL PERJURY!!!
> 34 That on December 8, 1998, Defendant sent Plaintiff an
>electronic communication stating in pertinent part:
>
>All Nizkooks need to be apprehended, interrogated, and placed in protective
>custody until a final solution can be made.
>
> Doc Tavish"
>
> Said telephonic communication is attached hereto and made part
>hereof as Exhibit "A11."
PROOF THE ABOVE SWORN STATEMENT IS PERJURED:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=84C06A88F1507F28.B631F6D1B209C3CD.7C009BBF34A90591%40library-proxy.airnews.net&output=gplain
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=84C06A88F1507F28.B631F6D1...@library-proxy.airnews.net&lr=&hl=en
(Archived locally as: A-11Not1 and A-11Not2)
From: Pee Kitty <Pki...@mariner.cris.com>
Subject: Re: Furmanski is lame
Date: 1998/12/20
Message-ID:
<84C06A88F1507F28.B631F6D1...@library-proxy.airnews.net>#1/1
X-Orig-Message-ID: <20129820...@grinding.net>
NNTP-Posting-Time: Sun Dec 20 21:15:30 1998
Organization: Digital Highway (using Airnews.net!)
NNTP-Proxy-Relay: library3
Abuse-Reports-To: abuse at dhc.net to report improper postings
Newsgroups: alt.slack,alt.newsangels
> From: ya...@enter.net (Yale F. Edeiken)
> Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
> Subject: Re: Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Nizkook Band
> References: <19981207212932...@ng-cb1.aol.com>
> X-Newsreader: SPRY News 3.03 (SPRY, Inc.)
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.170.16.148
> X-NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.170.16.148
> Message-ID: <366ca...@news3.enter.net>
> Date: 7 Dec 1998 22:57:39 +0500
all nizkooks need to be apprehended, interrogated, and placed in protective
custody until a final solution can be made
~~End of Exact GOOGLE Archive~~
Once again a post Yale admitted in a sworn statement signed "Doc Tavish"
when it is obvious another person posted it! PERJURY!!!!!
THE FOLLOWING IS THE CROWN OF MANUFACTURING EVIDENCE AND REMEMBER ALL OF THIS
FALSE TESTIMONY WAS SUBMITTED TO A CIVIL COURT AS SWORN STATEMENTS BY CRIMINAL
PERJURER NAMED YALE F. EDEIKEN OF ALLENTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA!!
The following false contrived accusation is the pinnacle of perjury or
manufacturing of evidence to be submitted as sworn testimony in a court of law
and this was done by a Plaintiff (who was his own attorney and who is an
attorney) against the Defendant; me. I will slam dunk this criminality in full
just below!
> 39 That on November 11, 1999, Defendant sent Plaintiff an
>electronic communication stating in pertinent part:
>
>"You are just as much of a filthy little cock sucker vermin as your butt
>buddy Jeff Brown. You have to rely on out of context quotes and character
>assassination. It would be a pleasure to see someone slowly work you over
>with an ice pick Yale!"
>
> --digsig
> Authentic Doc Tavish
>
> 191xllxyGtVQwy0mtCiBjivyX+knCUXYwdRt ptdrtqb
> qfQbXQtisWlB/E1+yWkYkw1Wr7mGiAFcJ w6Wl/aU
> 4GEbQtlQOHN/G3asOLBC9JmQXWuqXwj BnPCuOV9cd
>
> Said telephonic communication is attached hereto and made part
>hereof as Exhibit "A-16."
Positive proof 100% that the Plaintiff willfully and most maliciously lied to a
civil court with the above accusation:
Xref:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=d0ic0v81gdhrd1djqe4k4k2mnvq4c4sdi5%404ax.com&output=gplain
Message-ID: <d0ic0v81gdhrd1djq...@4ax.com>
39 That on November 11, 1999, Defendant sent Plaintiff an
electronic communication stating in pertinent part:
"You are just as much of a filthy little cock sucker vermin as your butt
buddy Jeff Brown. You have to rely on out of context quotes and character
assassination. It would be a pleasure to see someone slowly work you over
with an ice pick Yale!"
--digsig
Authentic Doc Tavish
191xllxyGtVQwy0mtCiBjivyX+knCUXYwdRt ptdrtqb
qfQbXQtisWlB/E1+yWkYkw1Wr7mGiAFcJ w6Wl/aU
4GEbQtlQOHN/G3asOLBC9JmQXWuqXwj BnPCuOV9cd
Said telephonic communication is attached hereto and made part
hereof as Exhibit "A-16."
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
Yale F. Edeiken
<end>
Notice what was said in an anonymous post (shown just below) and the date of the
post and compare it to what Yale F. Edeiken charges just above! Remember Yale
claimed I e-mailed the above to him and he claimed I signed it and had my
digital signature and this was done in a sworn document admitted to a civil
court of law!
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&rnum=1&ic=1&selm=199902171515.KAA08970%40domains.invweb.net
(Archived locally as: AnonIcePick1 and AnonIcePick2)
From: Anonymous (nob...@openpgp.net)
Subject: Re: Joe Bellinger, Proven Liar
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Date: 1999/02/17
> > >>It is thus established that:
> > >>
> > >> - Joe Bellinger stated that he does, in fact, "post deliberate
> > >>misinformation".
> > >> - Joe Bellinger denied having made said statement.
> > >> - Joe Bellinger is, therefore, a liar.
> > >>
> > >>To coin a phrase: GAME, SET, MATCH.
> > >Did anyone expect any different result?
> > LOL! For grown men, you are all so childish.
:
> Expecting some minimal level of honesty -- a low standard which
> you seem incapable of meeting -- is hardly "childish."
>
> It frightens me that, with attitudes like this, you are raising a
> child.
>
> In article <19990112213243...@ng31.aol.com>,
> deb...@aol.com
> (Debunks) wrote: "I post deliberate misinformation . . ."
>
> --YFE
You are just as much of a filthy little cock sucker vermin as your butt
buddy Jeff Brown. You have to rely on out of context quotes and character
assassination. It would be a pleasure to see someone slowly work you over
with an ice pick Yale!
~~End of GOOGLE aka DejaCom Archive~~
Notice the above was an anonymous post. It was not an e-mail and notice that it
had no digital signature signed by me! Also notice the big difference in dates
the above was posted February 17, 1999 yet Yale accuses me: "That on November
11, 1999, Defendant sent Plaintiff an electronic communication stating in
pertinent part (the above EXACT quoted text)"
Witness this:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&rnum=6&ic=1&selm=osjdbt41kq8ov7moqagjivihjnda67vadt%404ax.com
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 22:07:41 -0600
Message-ID: <osjdbt41kq8ov7moq...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=96fnp3%242bar%2...@news.tht.net&lr=&hl=en
(Archived locally as: LibelousPerjury)
From: kmc...@veritas.nizkor.org (Kenneth McVay, OBC)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,soc.culture.jewish,alt.conspiracy
Subject: "ALL FACTS IN THE COMPLAINT ... ARE DEEMED ADMITTED."
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 05:00:19 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: The Nizkor Project, http://www.nizkor.org/
Message-ID: <96fnp3$2bar$1...@news.tht.net>
Archive/File: people/b/bradbury.scott/Edeiken-v-Bradbury.C1
Last-Modified: 2001/02/14
--digsig
Authentic Doc Tavish
191xllxyGtVQwy0mtCiBjivyX+knCUXYwdRt ptdrtqb
qfQbXQtisWlB/E1+yWkYkw1Wr7mGiAFcJ w6Wl/aU
4GEbQtlQOHN/G3asOLBC9JmQXWuqXwj BnPCuOV9cd
Said telephonic communication is attached hereto and made part
hereof as Exhibit "A-16."
<stop>
Crypto Kong does not insert blank lines in between "Authentic Doc Tavish"
and the crypto-text as confirmed by the software's author to both myself
and my attorney!
Here is the official reply to my inquiry:
X-Sender: jam...@shell11.ba.best.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 08:51:20 -0800
To: Scott Bradbury <xx...@flash.net>
From: "James A. Donald"
Subject: Re: Inquiry on Crypto-Kong Signatures
Cc: "Daylin B. Leach - Attorney at Law" <xxx...@aol.com>
--
At 0412 AM 2/23/2001 -0600, Scott Bradbury wrote
> The above forged digital signataure is verbatim and is exactly which was
> presented to the court.
To be presented to the court, it must be alleged to have signed
something. A digital signature without the text that it signed is of no
significance.
(Note: I did not include Yale's fabricated e-mail- I just sent Mr. Donald
the forged digital signature.)
> The digsig also has a blank line in between "Authentic Doc
> Tavish" and the bogus crypto-text. Your software does not do this in
> ANY example I've ever seen.
That is perfectly true. My program does not emit such blank lines, which
suggest fabrication, but not strong evidence of anything much, since the
blank line could have arisen from various accidents in transferring text
from one program to another.
> I do this for the benefit of my attorney. -)
--digsig
James A. Donald
6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
GnwV4rmsIA8faEZwt0YOXUiSSJflZjiLd/kTrWIn
4F1jg73LTqhfLPw9BVz2uDGwa7v2WYBG0wNGHSkoM
<END>
--
As for Mr. Donald's statement: "the blank line could have arisen from
various accidents in transferring text from one program to another"-
the above fabricated signature from Edeiken's complaint is verbatim in the
group of false accusations known as "ALL FACTS IN THE COMPLAINT ... ARE
DEEMED ADMITTED." Notice Mr. Donald's digsig? No spaces and blank lines!
Notice my digsig made on this paragraph alone?
--digsig
Authentic Doc Tavish
Chyeer+xvAMg6mRtq2niuMN+bMnEkGsy0ShVPm2xATn
ejnWmIh1JCyv0DNQedTMFE/cAfXBLuqdxSAkk9w/
4O0CysIswhm2G04W2mJFeW7C7K5RHQkNr3oFBzH6X
NO BLANK LINES AND SPACES!
What are the penalties for submitting manufactured evidence?
[...]
Here is Yale making his false accusation in public forum:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3920d160.112256232%40news.flash.net&rnum=1
(Archived locally as: YalesLies)
Subject: Yale's Anonymous Post Signed By Me?! What an Oaf! aka Re: Bradbury
Caught in a Psychotic Delusional Rage
Date: 2000/05/16
Message-ID: <3920d160....@news.flash.net>
On Tue, 16 May 2000 04:12:22 GMT, "Yale F. Edeiken" <ya...@enter.net>
<GU3U4.3347$v%5.24...@newshog.newsread.com> wrote:
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=GU3U4.3347%24v%255.2...@newshog.newsread.com&lr=&hl=en
(Archived locally as: YaleLied1 and YaleLied2)
>Doc Tavish <doc_t...@NOSPAMmy-deja.com> wrote in message
>news:3920c22c....@news.flash.net...
[...]
>> > Perhaps you should ask your shrink about people who write anonumus
>> >notes to others like:
>> >
>> > " You are just as much of a filthy little cock sucker vermin as your
>> >butt buddy Jeff Brown. You have to rely on out of context quotes and
>> >character assassination. It would be a pleasure to see someone slowly
>> >work you over with an ice pick Yale!"
>> The above is just exactly what you said it is Yale, "anonumus" your word!
>> Just because you are a paranoid and have a psychotic dislike of me does
>> not mean every thing you imagine comes from me.
:
> It came from you
Then why didn't you show the headers which would show so Yale?
>and was signed by you.
Then why didn't you show my signature? If I signed it and it was from me
as you claim why do you call it "anonumus"? It would not be so if were
truly from me as headers would show and it actually had my signature!
What did you say in just another post about the "e-mail" above Yale? Your
own words again: "Perhaps you should ask your shrink about people who
write anonumus notes to others like:" It's ANONYMOUS Yale! You've said so!
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=Ms1U4.3324%24v%255.238968%40newshog.newsread.com&rnum=1
Archived locally as: Nradbury1 and Nradbury2)
From: "Yale F. Edeiken" <ya...@enter.net>
Subject: Re: Nradbury Goes Off the Deep End
Date: 2000/05/16
Message-ID: <Ms1U4.3324$v%5.23...@newshog.newsread.com>
(Exact quote for the record)
" I think you need a good psychiatirc examination. Perhaps you should ask
your shrink about people who write anonumus notes to others like: " You
are just as much of a filthy little cock sucker vermin as your butt buddy
Jeff Brown. You have to rely on out of context quotes and character
assassination. It would be a pleasure to see someone slowly work you over
with an ice pick Yale!""
No headers and no signature.
I guess the above is fair proof that Yale likes to forge e-mail even if it
is in his word "anonumus."
>> Your failure to do the same is noted. And will be by the judge.
>> --YFE
~~End of GOOGLE Archive Excerpt (With updated GOOGLE links)~~
PERJURY!!
Remember Sara you did admit this the other day:
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=catamont-FB0D63...@news-60.giganews.com&lr=&hl=en
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 17:58:10 -0600
From: Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Leon Salzman Actionable for Unprofessional Libel? Could Be! Perhaps
I Should Consult with my Local Attorney!!
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
References: <jo0ktvo8vvbs51uja...@4ax.com>
<ge1ktvoqm9b3df3ga...@4ax.com>
<UTqCb.15017$aF2.1...@news20.bellglobal.com>
<0ciktv8tgf9mkah5a...@4ax.com>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.2 (PPC Mac OS X)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:57:19 -0700
Message-ID: <catamont-FB0D63...@news-60.giganews.com>
(Archived locally as: SaraPerjurAdmits)
EXCERPT
> Here are a some questions I bet you will dodge and they are simple questions!
>
> 1) Is fabricating evidence and submitting it to a civil court a criminal
> offense? Yes or No?
Yes.
<STOP>
Code of Professional Responsibility Comparison:
With regard to Rule 3.4(a), DR 7-109(A) provides that ‘‘A lawyer shall not
suppress any evidence that he or his client has a legal obligation to reveal . .
CLERK OF COURTS OF LEHIGH COUNTY - CIVIL DIVISION
Lehigh County Courthouse
455 W. Hamilton Street
Allentown, PA 18101-1614
RE: Edeiken Vs Bradbury 1999-C-2786
Filed September 22, 2000
PETTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT
COMES NOW, the defendant, Scott Bradbury, by and through his counsel Daylin B.
Leach, Esquire, to petition this honorable court for Relief from Judgment,
pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 237.3. In support of this petition, the defendant avers
the following:
On August 25, 2000, the Plaintiff filed a Praecipe for Default Judgment with
this court. A true and correct copy of which is hereto and marked as "Exhibit
A."
Since a complaint has never been filed or served, the defendant is unable to
attach a copy of preliminary objections he would file if the judgment was opened
pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 237.3 (a).
"...When attorney Leach asked Mr. Edeiken for a copy of the complaint when he
first becomes involved in the case, he is told "Fuck You" via e-mail. In plain
English, this is not a lawsuit, it is a bizarre war waged by Mr. Edeiken on a
man he has never met. The court should not be a party to this."
Respectfully submitted
Daylin B. Leach Esquire
<END>
The key statements above were: "Since a complaint has never been filed or
served, the defendant is unable to attach a copy of preliminary objections he
would file if the judgment was opened pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 237.3 (a)." AND
"When attorney Leach asked Mr. Edeiken for a copy of the complaint when he first
becomes involved in the case, he is told "Fuck You" via e-mail." IOW I was not
given my right to due process by Edeiken to defend myself from his numerous
documented perjurious accusations and some are detailed here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=&selm=ja362v4amltqohp97uo053rju5erbf80qr%404ax.com
Subject: Ken McVay's "Edeiken-v-Bradbury.C1" Is Filled With Lies and Perjury...
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:23:54 -0600
Message-ID: <ja362v4amltqohp97...@4ax.com>
With regard to Rule 3.4(b), DR 7-102(A)(6) provides that a lawyer shall not
‘‘Participate in the creation or preservation of evidence when he knows or it is
obvious that the evidence is false.’’
See the above link for many instances of "falsifying evidence!"
Rule 8.4. Misconduct.
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
(a) violate or attempt to violate the rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another;
(b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty,
trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects;
(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or
misrepresentation;
(d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice;
Comment
Many kinds of illegal conduct reflect adversely on fitness to practice law,
such as offenses involving fraud and the offense of willful failure to file an
income tax return. However, some kinds of offense carry no such implication.
Traditionally, the distinction was drawn in terms of offenses involving ‘‘moral
turpitude.’’ That concept can be construed to include offenses concerning some
matters of personal morality, such as adultery and comparable offenses, that
have no specific connection to fitness for the practice of law. Although a
lawyer is personally answerable to the entire criminal law, a lawyer should be
professionally answerable only for offenses that indicate lack of those
characteristics relevant to law practice. Offenses involving violence,
dishonesty or breach of trust are in that category. A pattern of repeated
offenses, even ones of minor significance when considered separately, can
indicate indifference to legal obligation.
Compare " A pattern of repeated offenses, even ones of minor significance when
considered separately, can indicate indifference to legal obligation" to:
--Criminal Yale F. Edeiken's deplorable record:
http://padisciplinaryboard.org/attdiscdcd.php?id=40290
(Link active October 29, 2003. Archived locally as: shyster_censured)
Attorney ID - 40290
Edeiken, Yale F.
^^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Attorney Inquiry
Attorney ID Case County District
40290 122 DB 95 Lehigh II Public Censure Administered 10/20/98
^^^^^^^^^
<STOP>
A PDF file is available which gives a report on the above
122 DB 95 against Shyster Yale Fatso Edeiken:
http://padisciplinaryboard.org/attopinion.php?case=122DB95
^^^^^^^
http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/disciplinaryboard/dboardopinions/122DB95.RPT.pdf
(Link active October 28, 2003. Archived locally as: "Edeiken_Gets_His" and
122DB95.RPT)
The Disciplinary Board was content to give Yale F. Edeiken a "private reprimand"
but he continued to act like the psychotic nut case he is and defied them and
refused to appear at his hearing more than once! He was then "forced" to appear
and the "private reprimand" had escalated to "PUBLIC CENSURE" by the highest
court of that bastard's state! Furthermore the Disciplinary Board closed with:
"It is further ORDERED that respondent [Yale F. Edeiken] shall pay costs to the
Disciplinary Board pursuant to Rule 208(g), PaR.D.E." IOW Yale had to pay the
Disciplinary Board to "kick his shyster ass" AFTER the Disciplinary Board of the
Supreme Court of the State of Pennsylvania had to serve numerous notices upon
him and compel him to attend his disciplinary hearing!! Yale also had to pay for
all costs of the investigation too!
BTW Yale F. Edeiken had already received one "Private Reprimand" in 1993 and
Yale had received an "Informal Admonition" in 1995! Then the bastard got "PUBLIC
CENSURE" in 1998!!! Looks like Yale F. Edeiken is real shining example of the
legal profession doesn't it? Why that shyster still has his law license is a
mystery to me! His assaulting a Deputy Sheriff should have done him in- in 1990!
I.E.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3921e1e6.182032557%40news.newsguy.com&rnum=1
From: doc_t...@NOSPAMmy-deja.com (Doc Tavish)
Subject: CITY ATTORNEY FOUND GUILTY IN ELEVATOR CONFRONTATION
Date: 2000/05/17
Message-ID: <3921e1e6....@news.newsguy.com>
Yale is also a perjurer who also makes criminal death threats using subpoenaed
information:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=&selm=3bmv4vc9u4kh2qs4v84aek0qsbfhb5eul8%404ax.com
Subject: Test this, David Michael aka Ken McVay's "Edeiken-v-Bradbury.C1" Is
Filled With Lies and Perjury...
Message-ID: <3bmv4vc9u4kh2qs4v...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=gsk76vcng7f0cugmimalglbno6bmgmslhk%404ax.com&rnum=2
Subject: Yale F. Edeiken Admits Sending Death Threats Over The Internet is a
Federal Crime (Which He Has Done!)
Message-ID: <gsk76vcng7f0cugmi...@4ax.com>
Moving on:
DR 7-102(A)(1) provides that a lawyer shall not ‘‘take . . . action on behalf of
his client when he knows or when it is obvious that such action would serve
merely to harass or maliciously injure another.’’
Yale was his own lawyer thus his own client and he lied about being his own
lawyer too! Yale violated the above rule! I.E. he subpoenaed my medical records
and lied about what they stated in public forum!!
Proof Yale lied about being his own attorney and proof he lied about subpoenaing
my identity, address, and telephone number which he abused to post death threats
with my name, address, and telephone number attached:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=b5JH4.301%24%25L6.22667%40monger.newsread.com&rnum=1
(Archived locally as: YFESubpoenaAttorneyLies and YFESubpoenaAttorneyLies2)
From: "Yale F. Edeiken" <ya...@enter.net>
Subject: Re: --->Violation of USC Title 18, Chapter 13, Section 241?-- Edeiken's
Legal Troubles Deepen<---
Date: 2000/04/08
Message-ID: <b5JH4.301$%L6.2...@monger.newsread.com>
References: <8cnap...@news2.newsguy.com>
Defendant Bradbury <sonn...@flash.net> wrote in message
news:8cnap...@news2.newsguy.com...
> I was going to take some days off for rest and relaxation but the official Doc Tavish
> hotline rang and I was advised that a Yale F. Edeiken mailing list recipient
That's a lie.
> Yale F. Edeiken is also on record as claiming that he never posted
> my private information. "
I never did.
> ((Tavish comment April 8, 2000-- Morris' assumption "I suspect that his
> own attorneys obtained the information" is only valid to the point that
> Edeiken has no attorneys
That's a lie. The name of my attorney is being kept confidential WITH
THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE PRESIDENT JUDGE AND CLERK becasue of your attempts to
incite criminal harassment.
> > And then Yale had it posted over USENET.
>
> That is, of course, a lie. I never posted it anywhere.
>
> Defendant Tavish's statement is mnore evidence of his continued
> defamation.
> ((Tavish comment April 8, 2000-- Notice Yale denied "posting"
> my personal information however he did NOT deny getting it from
> my ISP (Flash Net) using his power of attorney! Very vital!))
Then I do so now.
> The above is adequate to go before a federal grand jury
Only if you want to be laughed at.
> Seeing how more than one person is/was involved the following applies to
> Yale F. Edeiken:
That is, of course, utter nonsense and represents another defamatory
[iblication.
The remainder of this dishonest post from the diseased mind of Scott
Bradbury (sonn...@flash.net) writing under the name of "Doc Tavish" is
deleted as the garbage that it is.
Scott Bradbury of <where I live deleted>, is well-know for the perverted
charactiture of Christianity which he espouses and for spamming his
basically incoherent ravings to dozens of unrelated newsgroups. He is a
notorious liar and anti-Semite whose activities are characterized by utter
dishonesty and include such criminal activities as forging the posts of
others and issuing death threats. He has threatened one person who exposed
his lies with sexual molestation, torture, death and mutilation. There is,
of course, not a word of truth in the venom he spews so freely.
--YFE
The Holocaust History Project is at http://www.holocaust-history.org/
The Einsatzgruppen page is at http://www.pgonline.com/electriczen/
The Cybrary of the Holocaust is at http://www.remember.org/
~~End of GOOGLE Archive~~
Count all of Yale's lies which he will have to answer for in coming days in just
one post he made above. Here they are enumerated:
LIE NUMBER 1 EXPOSED:
> I was going to take some days off for rest and relaxation but the official Doc Tavish
> hotline rang and I was advised that a Yale F. Edeiken mailing list recipient
That's a lie.
Proof Yale distributed my address etc. via a mailing list:
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_uauthors=ya...@enter.net&as_umsgid=385e...@news3.enter.net&lr=&hl=en
(Archived locally as: YFEe-mailListLie and YFEe-mailListLie2)
From: "Yale F. Edeiken" <ya...@enter.net>
Subject: Re: Andrew spams again
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:26:56 -0500
NNTP-Posting-Host: atmax-9-4.enter.net
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: atmax-9-4.enter.net
Message-ID: <385e...@news3.enter.net>
X-Trace: 20 Dec 1999 11:27:29 -0500, atmax-9-4.enter.net
Organization: Enter.Net
Fergus McClelland <re...@perdrix.demon.co.uk > wrote in message
news:faxdOHnEHgDROZ...@4ax.com...
> "Yale F. Edeiken" <ya...@enter.net> wrote:
> >Fergus McClelland <re...@perdrix.demon.co.uk > wrote in message
> >news:J7pZOIj+KpQFqo...@4ax.com...
> >> I think it wrong to give Tavish's details to a list, (though I can understand the
> >> pressure that may have led him to do so)
(Edeiken speaks):
> > Save it for the next time you are running for office.
((Tavish comment May 15, 2000-- Notice Edeiken did not deny giving
my details to a list as shown above. <<Lie #1 Exposed>>))
> It seems the best mitigation for your action to me.
(Edeiken speaks now in his "current" reply):
Nope. The best defense is the complete one. That it went to people
who had been victimized by Bradbury.
In fact, McVay's nonsense is just that. As all the recipients of the
e-mail except Ken knew was that there were then motions pending including
barring Bradbury from obtaining such material from me because of his
invasions of privacy and threats.
((Tavish comment May 15, 2000-- Notice Edeiken said precisely: "As all the
recipients of the e-mail..." Who sent the e-mail to the list?
Yale F. Edeiken <<Lie #2 Exposed>>))
(Edeiken speaks):
> >I gave the information to a list of people who, almost without exception have
> >been the vicitims of threats of violence or criminal harassment from Bradbury. If
> >you ahve a problem with that, I could care less.
((Tavish comment May 15, 2000-- Notice Edeiken said precisely: "I gave the
information to a list of people" yet he now claims: "There is no such
mailing list.." <<Lie #3 Exposed>>))
<end>
=================================================================================
LIE NUMBER 2 EXPOSED:
> Yale F. Edeiken is also on record as claiming that he never posted
> my private information. "
I never did.
You did as "nazihunter" in December 1999 as proven beyond fault with this
archive:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=gsk76vcng7f0cugmimalglbno6bmgmslhk%404ax.com&rnum=2
Subject: Yale F. Edeiken Admits Sending Death Threats Over The Internet is a
Federal Crime (Which He Has Done!)
Message-ID: <gsk76vcng7f0cugmi...@4ax.com>
> > And then Yale had it posted over USENET.
>
> That is, of course, a lie. I never posted it anywhere.
>
> Defendant Tavish's statement is mnore evidence of his continued
> defamation.
===============================================================================
LIE NUMBER 3 EXPOSED:
> ((Tavish comment April 8, 2000-- Morris' assumption "I suspect that his
> own attorneys obtained the information" is only valid to the point that
> Edeiken has no attorneys
That's a lie. The name of my attorney is being kept confidential WITH
THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE PRESIDENT JUDGE AND CLERK becasue of your attempts to
incite criminal harassment.
<end>
All court documents list you and you alone as yo being your own attorney- s0o
you are a liar!
I.E.
CLERK OF COURTS OF LEHIGH COUNTY - CIVIL DIVISION
Lehigh County Courthouse
455 W. Hamilton Street
Allentown, PA 18101-1614
RE: Edeiken Vs Bradbury 1999-C-2786
Partial text of letter from Judge Reibman:
<START>
Copies of this order were mailed to all counsel of record and pro se litigants.
CC: Counsel for Plaintiff (Yale F. Edeiken): Yale F. Edeiken Esq.
Counsel for Defendant (Scott Bradbury) : Daylin B. Leach Esq.
[...]
BY THE COURT:
(Signed) Edward J. Reibman, J.
<STOP>
Who is listed as counsel for Yale F. Edeiken? Answer: Yale F. Edeiken!
How many lies does this make so far?
========================================================================
LIE NUMBER 4 EXPOSED:
(Note I already proved Yale was his own attorney just above and he lied about
being his own attorney!)
> ((Tavish comment April 8, 2000-- Notice Yale denied "posting"
> my personal information however he did NOT deny getting it from
> my ISP (Flash Net) using his power of attorney! Very vital!))
Then I do so now.
<end>
Yale denied doing so UNTIL I got my ISP to FWED me his subpoena which I posted
and then he changed his tune BUT the above proves he lied!
The subpoena which does not show on the docket (which means it was not
registered with the court) and it went directly to Yale's residence where he
distributed the info on it after making his death threat posts!
I.E.
"Flash Net Communications, File number 99-C-2786 with a heading: Yale F.
Edeiken Vs Scott Bradbury aka sonn...@flash.net demanding: "(1)
Application for services and all other written materials including
e-mails, complaints or memoranda of internal investigation of
sonn...@flash.net" "This subpoena was issued at the request of the
following person: Yale F. Edeiken, Allentown, PA 18104 Supreme Court ID#
40290"
{Issued November 30, 1999 and the return address was:
Yale F. Edeiken
918 North Bayard Street
Allentown, PA 18104]
-----
Yale also denied me my legal right to quash the subpoena he used to rob me of my
right to privacy and he did not turn it over to the court either for it to
become "public information" as I prove here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=8OSy5.1269%24mC.69080%40monger.newsread.com&rnum=3
Message-ID: <8OSy5.1269$mC.6...@monger.newsread.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 00:27:48 GMT
"Materail that is subpoenaed must be turned over... The material becomes public
information unless a court orders otherwise. Subpoenas are NOT automatically
issued and the other side has an opportnuity to ogject ("quash") any subpoena."
<END>
That subpoena was NOT "turned over" and it does NOT appear on the docket thus it
is NOT "public information" and for a FACT I was not allowed to object or quash
it!
Proof Yale F. Edeiken was e-mailing me against my will BEFORE he issued his
subpoena to rape my right to privacy:
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q=Tavish%20Stop%20e-mailing%20me&safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&lr=&as_drrb=b&as_mind=1&as_minm=1&as_miny=1999&as_maxd=30&as_maxm=11&as_maxy=1999&hl=en
Searched Groups for Tavish Stop e-mailing me from Jan 1, 1999 to Nov 30, 1999.
Results 1 - 10 of about 47
Sample returns:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=omf04.1622%240p4.233526%40news.flash.net&rnum=2
More E-Mail From Yale- Edited for Brevity
... to make charges.BTW sphincter muscle- stop e-mailing me! ... time and again
to stop it but ... digsig Authentic Doc Tavish
191xllxyGtVQwy0mtCiBjivyX+knCUXYwdRtptdrtqb ...
sci.skeptic - Nov 28, 1999 by Tavish -
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=swE_3.7751%2416.888799%40news.flash.net&rnum=4
Is Yale F. Edeiken as Deluded as Andrew Skolnick? Most Likely!
... not ask you numerous times to desist from e-mailing me? ...
sci.skeptic - Nov 23, 1999 by Tavish
Why didn't Yale allow me my legal right to due process and allow me to quash the
subpoena by e-mail? Yale did afterall state: "Materail that is subpoenaed must
be turned over... Subpoenas are NOT automatically issued and the other side has
an opportnuity to ogject ("quash") any subpoena."
Why would Yale advise me he subpoenaed info from my ISP when it was his belief I
would never find out? For a fact he did not turn the subpoena over to the court!
It is now quite evident that 918 North Bayard Street; Allentown, PA 18104 is his
home address which makes it look real odd that Yale filed that lawsuit under
this address:
Yale F. Edeiken
c/o Trainor Law Offices (Paul E. Trainor)
1720 Fairmont Street
Allentown PA 18104
Phone: (610) 434-7004
Fax: (610) 434-6978
I have looked at some other court documents and some were addressed to Yale at
the 918 North Bayard Street which is obviously his home address which he has
concealed for all these years!
Thank you whoever you are for providing this very incriminating piece of
evidence!
Looks like I will have to update the addresses on my standard reply to shits who
like to post where I live to reflect the true address of the bastard who
violated my right to privacy!
<END>
===============================================================================
Did anyone count all the lies the officer of the court has told so far?
LIE NUMBER 5 EXPOSED:
Edeiken posted this libel over three hundred times in reply (to posts such as
this very one) which exposed him for the evil liar he truly is. Count the
unbecoming of an officer of the court libels"
>Scott Bradbury of <where I live deleted>,
Obviously meant to intimidate me by posting my real identity and where I live
and then following it with defamatory lies and smears!
>is well-know for the perverted charactiture of Christianity which he espouses
>and for spamming his basically incoherent ravings to dozens of unrelated newsgroups.
Yale never could cope with posts such as these much less refute them:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=5rhktv483m9oofgqt8goir93o4pm08ht49%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: UPDATED: 3 Major Jewish Organizations Engage in Holocaust Denial in
Addition to Their anti-Christic Christ Denial anti-Christism
Message-ID: <5rhktv483m9oofgqt...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=1ioifv01joma9fjqpa361host2smg0un2n%404ax.com&rnum=2
Subject: Today's Judaism is the Same Stuff Jesus Condemned ~2000 Years Ago
(Which Has Had Some Additions Made Since Then) V3.0 R_0625
Message-ID: <1ioifv01joma9fjqp...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=vd01cvsh9ta3ep7b3crfru9ce2rb0snnls%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Children of the Devil and Anti-Christ[s] Positively Identified Using
Scripture-- Check The Proofs For Yourselves! V2.0
Message-ID: <vd01cvsh9ta3ep7b3...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=m1p5nv4es86j78p5dr5pe41l8pi3vfcst0%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: UPDATED The Most Heinous Murder Plot Ever Devised (For Your Archives &
Research) V2.5 R_0925
Message-ID: <m1p5nv4es86j78p5d...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=i31ucv4nvr6ehh6r2jgq8d7orrpfhm3j09%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: The Apostle Paul on Judaized Jews R_0524
Message-ID: <i31ucv4nvr6ehh6r2...@4ax.com>
>He is a notorious liar
You are the notorious liar you perjurer and smearer of men. What can one expect
from one of the Children of the Devil who is the Father of Lies?
>and anti-Semite
That term of opprobrium doesn't work on me shyster. Anyone who slam dunks a
Pharisee and shows him for the filth he/she is will always be called an
anti-Semite and/or nazi!
>whose activities are characterized by utter dishonesty
You are the dishonest one! I show proof of what I make accusations one whereas
you don't and what proofs you submitted to a civil court against me were all
lies and fabrications!
>and include such criminal activities as forging the posts of
>others and issuing death threats.
That's what you did to me Tubby starting in December 1999 and I have all the
posts saved too!
>He has threatened one person who exposed his lies with sexual molestation, torture,
>death and mutilation.
Another lie which you and your star won't substantiate because you can't and
even then your star witness, who is a liar and perjurer such as yourself, hasn't
kept her lie straight!
I.E.
VERSION ONE: (Submitted as evidence against mein a civil via Edeiken's failed
kook lawsuit against me):
AFFIDAVIT
I, Sara Salzman, being duly sworn, state as follows:
[...]
5. That someone using the alias of "Doc Tavish" is one of the
anti-Semitic activists who have harassed Deponent, and Deponent believes
that "Doc Tavish" is Scott Bradbury , the Defendant herein.
6. That the harassment by the anti-Semitic activists, including "Doc
Tavish," has taken the form of, among other things, threats of violence,
including threatening to sexually molest Deponent, threatening to
torture Deponent to death, and threatening to use her skin for "lampshades."
===========================================================================
VERSION TWO:
"(Someone) posted a message threatening to skin Salzman alive and use her
skin to make a new holster for his gun."
P.S. I Hate You
http://www.westword.com/issues/2000-08-10/feature3.html/page1.html
===========================================================================
Sara goes from "lampshades" to "skin Salzman alive and use her
skin to make a new holster for his gun." YET she has yet to show the alleged
post that I made such a post and directed it at her- Sara Salzman!!! You would
think she and Yale for that matter would be posting it left and right all over
the place wouldn't you? They think all they have to do is accuse and it is true
YET they will not show the post! (IT DOESN'T EXIST IN REALITY BUT ONLY IN THEIR
OWN MINDS!!)
Proof the above smear was directed at me:
This is from B'nai Brith Canada which is a communist front and which has abused
its tax exempt status to give financial aid to communist David Lethbridge (which
archival proof I will give the link to further down):
http://www.bnaibrith.ca/publications/audit2001/audit2001-03.html
(Archived locally as: BBsmearsME)
2001 Audit of Antisemitic Incidents
Patterns of Prejudice in Canada
SECTION 3: TECHNOLOGY — THE MECHANICS OF MASS HATE
ANTISEMITIC ACTIVITY ON THE INTERNET
Kenneth McVay, Director, The Nizkor Project
[...]
[Sara] Salzman, a volunteer for the Canadian-based Nizkor Project, an online
resource devoted to confronting and refuting the overt racism of Holocaust
denial, has been threatened countless times. These threats have included
violence, including sexual assault, torture, the use of her skin for lampshades,
and physical threats directed at her husband and children...
Threats and intimidation followed Sara’s announcement that she was going to
testify against a Texas racist during a pending Pennsylvania civil action...
Another attack, probably initiated by an Arkansas extremist, evidenced itself
when several hundred forged articles were published on the Internet, which
simply asked: “Ken McVay, are you a homosexual?” Similar material, along with
unfounded charges of criminal behavior, have been published by a Texas neo-nazi
activist who uses the alias “Doc Tavish”.... <END>
Thus I am a neo-nazi racist (though I am a registered voter and vote Republican
and neo-nazis as a whole don't vote) wants to make Sara into a lampshade in the
eyes of the liars at B'nai Brith and Ken McVay!
That is B'nai Brith running its libelous mouth! So much for the credibility of
The Nizkor Project, The Holocaust History Project and all the other little orgs
they have. If those people are not the least bit honest in the matters above
then why on Earth should they be believed in matters of history over sixty years
old and especially when they are so biased!?
BTW here is proof B'nai Brith and The Nizkor Project aid and abet communists:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=4186tvsr4d3oiodp2nibbuvuj91rakvimb%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: UPDATED! B'nai Brith Allies Itself With Communist David Lethbridge
Against Capitalism, and Christianity V2.0 R_1207
Message-ID: <4186tvsr4d3oiodp2...@4ax.com>
Date: 7 Dec 2003 12:48:39 GMT
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=p0afnvchj52pcuh6c0dk78f9bs7ngfetac%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: NIZKOR.ORG Allies Itself With Communist David Lethbridge Against
America, Capitalism, and Christianity R_0928
Message-ID: <p0afnvchj52pcuh6c...@4ax.com>
Date: 29 Sep 2003 03:38:54 GMT
Concerning the honesty of Ken McVay and his The Nizkor Project:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=07qc8vguuom77pvmugliksb3dmdf8pp82r%404ax.com&rnum=6
Subject: Did NIZKOR.ORG Director Ken McVay Pay Tax On Those $50k+ Donations He
Denies Receiving From the San Antonio Area Foundation - Nizkor Fund
Message-ID: <07qc8vguuom77pvmu...@4ax.com>
Date: 30 Mar 2003 03:49:22 GMT
NEWER UPDATED VERSION:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=f7murv0qqpmcfa2ldce7epo9gtg5am23rl%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: UPDATED The Nizkor Project Director is Lying About Funds He Has NOT
Reported to CCRA!! SAAF Report for 2002 Is Further Proof! R_1122
Message-ID: <f7murv0qqpmcfa2ld...@4ax.com>
Date: 22 Nov 2003 13:01:32 GMT
AKA "Did NIZKOR.ORG Director Ken McVay Pay Tax On Those $50k+ Donations He
Denies Receiving From the San Antonio Area Foundation - Nizkor Fund"
COMICAL DENIAL OF DOCUMENTED FACTS:
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=nlol001kbp1kh698t...@4ax.com&lr=&hl=en
Subject: Re: Ken McVay's (Director of The Nizkor Project) $50,000+ Tax Evasion
Exposed aka Re: Gosh Darn Uppity Juice!
Message-ID: <nlol001kbp1kh698t...@4ax.com>
Date: 18 Jan 2004 21:17:40 GMT
Need I say more?
Tavish
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=1g60hvoj0b21pn339...@4ax.com&lr=&hl=en
Subject: Palestine was Changed to a Socialist Jewish State in 1948 by Ben-Gurion
with Communist Soviet Union's Support
Message-ID: <1g60hvoj0b21pn339...@4ax.com>
Date: 12 Jul 2003 14:16:47 GMT
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=qf7acvoa8hfn3bi2fttrvo00fhaoi2f8ip%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Old Covenant Vs New -- New Covenant Replaces Old Covenant (Jews NO
Longer God's Chosen People & Entitled to "Israel" So Says the Scripture!)
Message-ID: <qf7acvoa8hfn3bi2f...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=u626vv814v0dt9raqv17ede0h4536l51ag%404ax.com&rnum=10&filter=0
Subject: V3.0e Forefathers of the Soviet State and Anti-Christ Communism R_1231
Message-ID: <u626vv814v0dt9raq...@4ax.com>
Date: 31 Dec 2003 17:34:02 GMT
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=nj3a009i4aj9ba7vo...@4ax.com&lr=&hl=en
Subject: If Communism Was/Is so Oppressive to Jews then Why Don't Jews Treat it
the Same as They Do Nazism? V3,0b S_0114
Message-ID: <nj3a009i4aj9ba7vo...@4ax.com>
Date: 14 Jan 2004 10:39:56 GMT
_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be Beaver Cleaver wrote
in message <kvi0105uqld85a7d2...@4ax.com>:
<snip inapplicable statute>
>Yale never served his complaints
False. He served them to you, entirely properly given that your
lawyer had not bothered to file an appearance and so was not
officially your lawyer in the eyes of the court.
You thought it would be so cute to send them back marked "Return to
Sender" that not only did you, but you actively boasted of having done
so on alt.rev.
It should also be noted that Yale has not posted to Usenet in years.
>and he falsified evidence which is condemned
>with: "Falsifying evidence is also generally a criminal offense. Paragraph (a)
>applies to evidentiary material generally, including computerized information."
Funny that you never bothered to prove that in a court of law...
<snip the Shame of Belleville trying to assert that because one set
of Usenet posts exist, another set of emails can't possibly, even
tho their existence has been accepted as fact in court>
>PERJURY!!
Nope. You really should stop abusing legal terms, especially when
you cross post to legal groups where they don't know enough to
immediately discount everything you say.
> With regard to Rule 3.4(a), DR 7-109(A) provides that 荘A lawyer shall not
>suppress any evidence that he or his client has a legal obligation to reveal . .
Nor did Yale.
<snip irrelevant and unproven claims by defending counsel>
>The key statements above were:
... "PETTION," especially when one considers that the final judgement
used nothing in this petition.
Which is why the Shame of Belleville will not refer to the actual
judgement -- it allows zie to pretend zie "won" a lawsuit whose
verdict was simply overturned without prejudice on a narrow
jurisdictional matter, and whose Findings of Fact remain exactly that.
<snip, dealt with above>
>Rule 8.4. Misconduct.
> It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
>
> (a) violate or attempt to violate the rules of professional conduct, knowingly
>assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another;
>
> (b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer痴 honesty,
>trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects;
>
> (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or
>misrepresentation;
>
> (d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice;
>
>
>Comment
>
> Many kinds of illegal conduct reflect adversely on fitness to practice law,
>such as offenses involving fraud and the offense of willful failure to file an
>income tax return. However, some kinds of offense carry no such implication.
>Traditionally, the distinction was drawn in terms of offenses involving 荘moral
>turpitude.鋳 That concept can be construed to include offenses concerning some
>matters of personal morality, such as adultery and comparable offenses, that
>have no specific connection to fitness for the practice of law. Although a
>lawyer is personally answerable to the entire criminal law, a lawyer should be
>professionally answerable only for offenses that indicate lack of those
>characteristics relevant to law practice. Offenses involving violence,
>dishonesty or breach of trust are in that category. A pattern of repeated
>offenses, even ones of minor significance when considered separately, can
>indicate indifference to legal obligation.
>
>Compare " A pattern of repeated offenses, even ones of minor significance when
>considered separately, can indicate indifference to legal obligation" to:
>
>--Criminal Yale F. Edeiken's deplorable record:
>http://padisciplinaryboard.org/attdiscdcd.php?id=40290
>(Link active October 29, 2003. Archived locally as: shyster_censured)
>
>Attorney ID - 40290
>Edeiken, Yale F.
>^^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^
> Pennsylvania Supreme Court Attorney Inquiry
>Attorney ID Case County District
>40290 122 DB 95 Lehigh II Public Censure Administered 10/20/98
> ^^^^^^^^^
><STOP>
>
>A PDF file is available which gives a report on the above
>122 DB 95 against Shyster Yale Fatso Edeiken:
>http://padisciplinaryboard.org/attopinion.php?case=122DB95
Not that the Shame of Belleville stoops to personal attacks or
anything...
<snip censure that SoB has no idea the reason for>\
>http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3921e1e6.182032557%40news.newsguy.com&rnum=1
>From: doc_t...@NOSPAMmy-deja.com (Doc Tavish)
>Subject: CITY ATTORNEY FOUND GUILTY IN ELEVATOR CONFRONTATION
>Date: 2000/05/17
>Message-ID: <3921e1e6....@news.newsguy.com>
Of course, SoB neglects to inform our new viewers that this case was
dismissed...
>Yale is also a perjurer who also makes criminal death threats using subpoenaed
>information:
<snip the Shame of Belleville citing *himself* to support zir
libels>
I think the learned gentlemen and ladies in these legal groups get the
idea. Each of these libels has been addressed, only to be
regurgitated ad nauseum by the Shame of Belleville under a variety of
nyms designed exclusively to avoid kill filters.
Now zie is boasting that zie is initiating proceedings again Yale. I
really hope this isn't yet another of SoB's empty claims -- I'd
really, *really* like to observe him dealing with the kettle of fish
zie'd be opening...
Sara Salzman
Roger <roger@ . > wrote:
> In one age, called the Second Age by some,
> (an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
> someone claiming to be Beaver Cleaver wrote
> in message <kvi0105uqld85a7d2...@4ax.com>:
>
> <snip inapplicable statute>
>
> >Yale never served his complaints
>
> False. He served them to you, entirely properly given that your
> lawyer had not bothered to file an appearance and so was not
> officially your lawyer in the eyes of the court.
>
> You thought it would be so cute to send them back marked "Return to
> Sender" that not only did you, but you actively boasted of having done
> so on alt.rev.
>
that was "return to Stalker"
> It should also be noted that Yale has not posted to Usenet in years.
at least two years, I believe.
>
> >and he falsified evidence which is condemned
> >with: "Falsifying evidence is also generally a criminal offense. Paragraph
> >(a)
> >applies to evidentiary material generally, including computerized
> >information."
>
> Funny that you never bothered to prove that in a court of law...
>
Bradbury keeps screaming that evidence was "falsified," yet his own
attorney NEVER QUESTIONED any of it.
> <snip the Shame of Belleville trying to assert that because one set
> of Usenet posts exist, another set of emails can't possibly, even
> tho their existence has been accepted as fact in court>
>
>
> >PERJURY!!
>
> Nope. You really should stop abusing legal terms, especially when
> you cross post to legal groups where they don't know enough to
> immediately discount everything you say.
>
>
Everything Yale submitted was accepted AS FACT, unless you think Judge
Reibman was a "partner" in this perjury.
>
[snip the rest of Bradbury's whining]
Sara
--
-My name is not "Fatbury Scumbag" you stupid lying Jew bastard. Name call
is all a pathetic loser like you has! You have yet to prove me wrong
you dirty filthy lying Jew bastard!
-I don't rely on personal attacks as my means of posting and
the bulk of my posts prove so! You can't discern the difference.
BTW my name is not Fatboy you stupid kike.
--Scott Bradbury, who completely misses the irony of the above
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
in message
<catamont-9452B6...@news-60.giganews.com>:
>> You thought it would be so cute to send them back marked "Return to
>> Sender" that not only did you, but you actively boasted of having done
>> so on alt.rev.
>that was "return to Stalker"
My bad -- Gaea chose that time span to want to play "gnaw the papa"
and I got distracted...
Joebruno
> http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/204/chapter81/chap81toc.html#3.4.
> ^^^^^^
>
<deletia>
Keep telling yourself that. If you say it long enough and don't think
too much about it, you might start to believe it.
Beaver Cleaver
<472c2def718f1d8d...@news.teranews.com> Roger <roger@ . > wrote:
>In one age, called the Second Age by some,
> (an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
> someone claiming to be Beaver Cleaver wrote
> in message <kvi0105uqld85a7d2...@4ax.com>:
>
> <snip inapplicable statute>
>
>>Yale never served his complaints
>
>False. He served them to you,
False!
>entirely properly given that your lawyer had not bothered to file an appearance
Why should he! He hadn't seen the complaints and he wasn't obliged to file and
appearance without seeing the complaints!
>and so was not officially your lawyer in the eyes of the court.
FALSE!
>
>You thought it would be so cute to send them back marked "Return to
>Sender" that not only did you,
Yale was obligated by th3e rules of professional conduct to furnish them to my
attorney. Yale was obliged by a written agreement to make NO MORE attempts to
contact me directly!! THAT IS FACT!
You also being the ignorant bastard you are keep overlooking these pertinent
facts:
My attorney advised Yale via e-mail (because Yale won't let other people know
where he lives or how he may be contacted [David Michael's attorney could never
find lard ass Edeiken either!]) that he, Daylin Leach was representing me and
that I was his client! Yale initially denied the e-mail agreement of May 29,
2000 existed and then later said it did and proved I was a liar!
I.E.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=38c4hv4b615oe2si2737c5fh6e8afnol1q%404ax.com&rnum=4
Subject: Legal System Abuse by a Pathological Liar Named Yale F. Edeiken Who
Lied About a May 29, 2000 E-Mail R_0713
Message-ID: <38c4hv4b615oe2si2...@4ax.com>
Date: 14 Jul 2003 04:20:19 GMT
Yale was bound by that agreement to no longer make any direct contact with me by
any means whatsoever starting May 29, 2000. He did not honor a written agreement
which the agency will see a certified copy of!
Furthermore Yale had posted via his proxy Ken McVay a 30 days notice AFTER the
lawsuit was dismissed in my favor :
<start/quote>
Archive/File: people/b/bradbury.scott/Edeiken-v-Bradbury-RA.01
Last-Modified: 2001/02/14
REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION
NOW COMES Plaintiff Yale F. Edeiken and demands that, pursuant to Rule
4014, Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant Scott Bradbury
admit or deny the truth of the following within thirty (30) days of service
or, by failing to do so, admit the truth of the matters asserted:
<end/quote>
Notice I was given 30 days? Yale got his default judgment on August 25, 2000
after those thirty days passed which only means that my attorney should have
received those complaints in late July so they could be answered! Of course you
liars claim I did not have an attorney BUT Yale knew I did and I have court
records proving Yale issued a subpoena on my attorney on July 14, 2000.
Docket printout for july 154, 20:
"July 14, 2000 PLTF'S NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE
DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY UPON DAYLIN LEACH. AFDT OF SERVICE
ATTACHED."
The above is on the docket of Edeiken Vs Bradbury 1999-C-2786
and anyone may obtain the docket for $3.00 and here is how:
Clerk Civil Court
Lehigh County Court House
Room 202
4555 West Hamilton Street
Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101-1614
610-782-3148
and "Request Docket Printout for Edeiken Vs Bradbury 1999-C-2786"
Thus Yale was obligated to send those complaints to my attorney whom I had paid
four digit legal fees to but was not able to do his job to the full because of
Yale violated numerous rules of procedure such as:
Filed September 22, 2000
PETTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT
COMES NOW, the defendant, Scott Bradbury, by and through his counsel Daylin B.
Leach, Esquire, to petition this honorable court for Relief from Judgment,
pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 237.3. In support of this petition, the defendant avers
the following:
On August 25, 2000, the Plaintiff filed a Praecipe for Default Judgment with
this court. A true and correct copy of which is hereto and marked as "Exhibit
A."
Since a complaint has never been filed or served, the defendant is unable to
attach a copy of preliminary objections he would file if the judgment was opened
pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 237.3 (a).
"[The] plaintiff engage[d] in a vendetta against the defendant. The court has
heard telephone messages left on the defendant's answering machine, in which
the plaintiff admits dedicating himself to making the defendant's life a "living
hell." ...Even after the defendant is represented by counsel, mail is still sent
directly to the defendant addressed to "Defendant Bradbury." ...When attorney
Leach asked Mr. Edeiken for a copy of the complaint when he first becomes
involved in the case, he is told "Fuck You" via e-mail. In plain English, this
is not a lawsuit, it is a bizarre war waged by Mr. Edeiken on a man he has never
met. The court should not be a party to
this."
Respectfully submitted
Daylin B. Leach Esquire
<END>
>but you actively boasted of having done
>so on alt.rev.
Sure did! Bastard Edeiken kept sending me posts he made which I wouldn't reply
and his kook rants etc. Re-read that petition above! The court saw it and
accepted it as fact!!!!!! It was also considered harassment!!!!
"Even after the defendant is represented by counsel, mail is still sent directly
to the defendant addressed to "Defendant Bradbury."
>It should also be noted that Yale has not posted to Usenet in years.
I am still being defamed and harassed because of that kook lawsuit and it is
obvious he is coaching you filth! The reason why that perjurer hasn't been heard
from since is because he got royally slam dunked but what happened to his fat
ass back then won't compared to what is coming down the pike for him now!
>>and he falsified evidence which is condemned
>>with: "Falsifying evidence is also generally a criminal offense. Paragraph (a)
>>applies to evidentiary material generally, including computerized information."
>
>Funny that you never bothered to prove that in a court of law...
NEVER COULD BECAUSE EDEIKEN NEVER PROVIDED THE COMPLAINTS!!!!!
Funny thing though that the complaints Yale should have served on my attorney
were posted all over USENET and web sites AFTER that kook lawsuit was dismissed
in my favor by Sara Salzman and Ken McVay!
> <snip the Shame of Belleville trying to assert that because one set
> of Usenet posts exist, another set of emails can't possibly, even
> tho their existence has been accepted as fact in court>
Because I was not allowed to have my day in court because of an unethical
attorney who does not follow the rules of civil procedure THOUGH I wanted that
bastard to re-file or win his appeal so the lawsuit would be re-tried from
square one!
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=sq4v2us0odig5nhq79f6crk7a2e7lsqh1s%404ax.com&rnum=6&filter=0
Subject: Why Yale F. Edeiken LOST His Appeal..
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 17:30:59 -0600
Message-ID: <sq4v2us0odig5nhq7...@4ax.com>
Excerpt
Yale didn't file a brief (as I see) for only two reasons:
1) He just wanted me to sink more money into attorney's fees as he even stated
it would cost me $5000.00 or so to counter his appeal as proven here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&rnum=1&selm=Uvie7.74%249d.11873%40newshog.newsread.com
From: "Yale F. Edeiken" <ya...@enter.net>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Snottie Bradshit, man without a lawyer
Message-ID: <Uvie7.74$9d.1...@newshog.newsread.com>
"Bradshit now claims that he refused to use Daylin because Leach asked
for $2,000.00 for the appeal. The average appeal in a personal injury
action required about 60-75 hours of work by an attorney. The going bottom
rate around here starts at about 5k. Either Bradshit is lying again or he
passed up an incredible bargain."
<END>
The above indicates Yale just wanted me to blow more money at $5000.00 worth to
fight a frivolous lawsuit based on manufactured evidence!
2) Yale may have chickened out if he reasoned on my attitude regarding his
appeal when I stated:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&rnum=1&selm=qcgjnt09sfbv8kgqgiov5716bui5vnu6ad%404ax.com
Subject: Re: Snottie Bradshit, man without a lawyer
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 19:41:14 -0500
Message-ID: <qcgjnt09sfbv8kgqg...@4ax.com>
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001 19:41:36 -0700, <9lccth$20e$2...@suaar1aa.prod.compuserve.com>
"PB" <patbl...@hotmaill.com> wrote:
>Yale F. Edeiken wrote in message ...
>
>> Bradshit now claims that he refused to use Daylin because Leach asked
>>for $2,000.00 for the appeal. The average appeal in a personal injury
>>action required about 60-75 hours of work by an attorney. The going bottom
>>rate around here starts at about 5k. Either Bradshit is lying again or he
>>passed up an incredible bargain.
:
>But this is not an appeal about a personal injury case in the classic sense,
>it is an appeal about jurisdiction. It would appear that your appeal has to
>do with more with Judge Reibman than it does with Tavish. If you would
>happen to be victorious, the judgment would be reinstated and sent back down
>to Reibman for further proceedings.
Either way I will win.
If he loses then he will finally shut up hopefully.
If he wins his appeal then it's back to square one and I will get to prove all
that he has done to me I.E. he was nazihunter in December 1999, he fabricated
evidence and the list is long. His appeal is based on whether my USENET postings
fall into Pennsylvania jurisdiction and that he claims the internet comes into
his residence via telephone lines, thus I am making telephone calls.
If he is stupid enough to push that argument then I have hundreds of obscene and
obnoxious telephone callas an officer of the court left on my answering machine
(e-mail) such as:
From: ya...@enter.net
To: <xx...@ix.netcom.com>, <doc_t...@my-deja.com>
Cc: <xx...@ix.netcom.com>, <doc_t...@my-deja.com>
Subject: Fw: DRUNKEN SOT ACCOSTS PEOPLE AT COUNTY COURT HOUSE
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2001 08:58:44 -0400
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
Attention Defendant Bradshit
Hey you lying fuck, did you post this your gutless self or was it one
of your homosexual, lovers?
----- Original Message -----
~~End of Excerpt~~
>>PERJURY!!
>
>Nope. You really should stop abusing legal terms, especially when
>you cross post to legal groups where they don't know enough to
>immediately discount everything you say.
Submitting manufactured evidence to a court of law is PERJURY and that is
exactly what yale F.Edeiken did! I love how you remain in denial over the
documented and obvious!
I.E.
--digsig
Authentic Doc Tavish
<end>
Witness this:
Archive/File: people/b/bradbury.scott/Edeiken-v-Bradbury.C1
Last-Modified: 2001/02/14
--digsig
Authentic Doc Tavish
<stop>
<END>
PERJURY!!
>> With regard to Rule 3.4(a), DR 7-109(A) provides that 荘A lawyer shall not
>>suppress any evidence that he or his client has a legal obligation to reveal . .
>
>Nor did Yale.
He did by not providing complaints to my attorney and also to David Michael's
attorney!
I.E.
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=39BBB347...@onetel.net.uk&lr=&hl=en
Message-ID: <39BBB347...@onetel.net.uk>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 17:13:59 +0100
From: david_michael <david_...@onetel.net.uk>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: The other Edeiken lawsuit
NNTP-Posting-Host: async170-6.nas.onetel.net.uk
X-Trace: 10 Sep 2000 17:14:15 GMT, async170-6.nas.onetel.net.uk
[...]
Mr Edeiken has filed a lawsuit against me in Pennsylvania. No documents
were ever served on me with regard to this lawsuit. Moreover, it stated
no cause of action. As Mr Edeiken had obviously assumed that I would
chicken out, allowing the thing simply to lapse unserved, I appointed an
attorney in PA to deal with him in a very non-chickenly way.
I recently received a communication from that attorney's paralegal that
stated, inter alia:
<begin quote>
Please be advised that we have filed the Rule to Show Cause in your
case. Mr. Edeiken must now move forward with this matter and file a
complaint . . . we are awaiting the statutory allowed time period during
which Mr. Edeiken can make a response.
<end quote>
Mr Edeiken evidently thought that he could use the law to silence
certain revisionist posters here.
We are now waiting for HIM to produce his arguments and evidence and
place them before the courts where he may rest assured that they will
meet a vigorous response.
~~End Of GOOGLE Archival Excerpt~~
> <snip irrelevant and unproven claims by defending counsel>
Can't refute them can you Yale?
>>The key statements above were:
>
>... "PETTION," especially when one considers that the final judgement
>used nothing in this petition.
>
>Which is why the Shame of Belleville will not refer to the actual
>judgement --
I have been referring to it and it was dismissed along with any and all claims
of damages-- a fact pinheads like you still won't accept as reality!!
>it allows zie to pretend zie "won" a lawsuit whose
>verdict was simply overturned without prejudice on a narrow
>jurisdictional matter, and whose Findings of Fact remain exactly that.
>
> <snip, dealt with above>
The only reason why those lies were accepted as fact was because I didn't
respond and the reason why was explained beyond any fault higher up!
Personal attacks? Yale has a deplorable record with the highest court of his
state yet his perjury against me with many false and libelous accusations was
the pinnacle of personal attacks!
>or anything...
>
> <snip censure that SoB has no idea the reason for>\
Sure do and I have posted it and that PDF file I have invited people to download
and view shows how much of a coward Yale was about showing up before the highest
court of his state!!
Here is what you conveniently deleted restored so everyone may see for
themselves!
--Criminal Yale F. Edeiken's deplorable record:
http://padisciplinaryboard.org/attdiscdcd.php?id=40290
(Link active October 29, 2003. Archived locally as: shyster_censured)
Attorney ID - 40290
Edeiken, Yale F.
^^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Attorney Inquiry
Attorney ID Case County District
40290 122 DB 95 Lehigh II Public Censure Administered 10/20/98
^^^^^^^^^
<STOP>
A PDF file is available which gives a report on the above
122 DB 95 against Shyster Yale Fatso Edeiken:
http://padisciplinaryboard.org/attopinion.php?case=122DB95
^^^^^^^
http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/disciplinaryboard/dboardopinions/122DB95.RPT.pdf
(Link active October 28, 2003. Archived locally as: "Edeiken_Gets_His" and
122DB95.RPT)
The Disciplinary Board was content to give Yale F. Edeiken a "private reprimand"
but he continued to act like the psychotic nut case he is and defied them and
refused to appear at his hearing more than once! He was then "forced" to appear
and the "private reprimand" had escalated to "PUBLIC CENSURE" by the highest
court of that bastard's state! Furthermore the Disciplinary Board closed with:
"It is further ORDERED that respondent [Yale F. Edeiken] shall pay costs to the
Disciplinary Board pursuant to Rule 208(g), PaR.D.E." IOW Yale had to pay the
Disciplinary Board to "kick his shyster ass" AFTER the Disciplinary Board of the
Supreme Court of the State of Pennsylvania had to serve numerous notices upon
him and compel him to attend his disciplinary hearing!! Yale also had to pay for
all costs of the investigation too! It's all detailed in that PDF file!! GO
LOOK!!
BTW Yale F. Edeiken had already received one "Private Reprimand" in 1993 and
Yale had received an "Informal Admonition" in 1995! Then the bastard got "PUBLIC
CENSURE" in 1998!!! Looks like Yale F. Edeiken is real shining example of the
legal profession doesn't it? Why that shyster still has his law license is a
mystery to me! His assaulting a Deputy Sheriff should have done him in- in 1990!
>>http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3921e1e6.182032557%40news.newsguy.com&rnum=1
>>From: doc_t...@NOSPAMmy-deja.com (Doc Tavish)
>>Subject: CITY ATTORNEY FOUND GUILTY IN ELEVATOR CONFRONTATION
>>Date: 2000/05/17
>>Message-ID: <3921e1e6....@news.newsguy.com>
>
>Of course, SoB neglects to inform our new viewers that this case was
>dismissed...
That is what Yale claimed and everyone who knows about him knows how he lies!
Also how funny is how you hold "dismissed" in a higher regard in deference to
Yale than you do my having Yale's kook lawsuit against me "dismissed." Why is
that Roger? I can prove that lawsuit was dismissed but we only have your say so
about the criminal conviction against Yale dismissed!
>>Yale is also a perjurer who also makes criminal death threats using subpoenaed
>>information:
>
> <snip the Shame of Belleville citing *himself* to support zir
>libels>
How am I citing myself when I show the accusations Yale submitted against me and
then proving they were manufactured evidence? My but you are stupid!
Here is that link which Roger deleted:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=&selm=3bmv4vc9u4kh2qs4v84aek0qsbfhb5eul8%404ax.com
Subject: Test this, David Michael aka Ken McVay's "Edeiken-v-Bradbury.C1" Is
Filled With Lies and Perjury...
Message-ID: <3bmv4vc9u4kh2qs4v...@4ax.com>
You also left this out:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=gsk76vcng7f0cugmimalglbno6bmgmslhk%404ax.com&rnum=2
Subject: Yale F. Edeiken Admits Sending Death Threats Over The Internet is a
Federal Crime (Which He Has Done!)
Message-ID: <gsk76vcng7f0cugmi...@4ax.com>
>I think the learned gentlemen and ladies in these legal groups get the
>idea. Each of these libels has been addressed, only to be
>regurgitated ad nauseum by the Shame of Belleville under a variety of
>nyms designed exclusively to avoid kill filters.
>
>Now zie is boasting that zie is initiating proceedings again Yale. I
>really hope this isn't yet another of SoB's empty claims -- I'd
>really, *really* like to observe him dealing with the kettle of fish
>zie'd be opening...
Yale is in for a very big surprise and oh how you defenders of a shyster will be
humiliated!
Tavish
Special Note: Yale F. Edeiken Esq. of Allentown, Pennsylvania- Supreme Court
ID# 40290 has falsely asserted he was associated with the two law firms
mentioned below-- Todd Miller & Associates and Trainor Law Offices. Both law
firms told me first hand that Yale F. Edeiken was never an attorney at their
firms!! That is fact!
(Archived locally as: YaleTheNut)
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=SH9g7.634%247d....@newshog.newsread.com&lr=&hl=en
From: "Yale F. Edeiken" <ya...@enter.net>
Subject: Re: The Common Thread To All These Cancel Announcements...
Message-ID: <SH9g7.634$7d.2...@newshog.newsread.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 15:06:26 GMT
Defendant Bradshit <rdoc_...@my-deja.cpm, tavi...@ix.netcom,com> wrote
in message news:7lp1otkrsh37k7ioi...@4ax.com...
[...]
> Care to tell all of us why both Todd Miller and Paul Trainor distanced
> themselves from you
Because they were dealing with someone who was "mentally unstable"
(their dscription) and a "crazy man" (again, their description) who they
wanted to go away as quckly as possible.
~~End of GOOGLE Archive~~
Compare what Yale said on August 20, 2001 concerning two law firms attitudes
toward his presence with his own words: "they were dealing with someone who was
"mentally unstable" (their dscription) and a "crazy man" (again, their
description) who they wanted to go away as quckly as possible" to this which was
posted July 4, 2000: "Tubby has no respect from the legal community and as a
whole they wish he'd just waddle away."
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=20000704143439.5399.qmail%40nym.alias.net&rnum=4
From: SoloP...@nym.alias.net
Subject: Yale _Tubby_ Edeiken
Date: 2000/07/04
Message-ID: <200007041434...@nym.alias.net>
Tavish The True
Beaver Cleaver
<catamont-9452B6...@news-60.giganews.com> Sara Salzman
<cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
Judge Reibman never had a chance to rule those complaints were perjurious seeing
how Yale didn't make them known to my attorney and myself (and be allowed to
refute or contest) until AFTER the lawsuit against me was dismissed in my favor!
>[snip the rest of Bradbury's whining]
Can't refute me can you pig!?
I slam dunked your fellow swine royally in this reply within this thread:
From: Beaver Cleaver <beaver_cleaver@mayfield01net>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,misc.legal,alt.legal,alt.lawyers
Subject: Re: Yale F. Edeiken ESQ. iIs In Deep Trouble!
Message-ID: <g6h1105sr8d4pllql...@4ax.com>
References: <kvi0105uqld85a7d2...@4ax.com>
<472c2def718f1d8d...@news.teranews.com>
Date: 23 Jan 2004 07:48:59 GMT
>Sara
Now go fist yourself or engage in some of that "safe torture" posted about
before you perverted lying filthy whore!
Sara "The Fist" Salzman on Safe Torture
Subject: Re: What is power? (was Re: Power Imbalance v. Power Exchange)
In article <3gv6bm$4...@crl9.crl.com>, ver...@crl.com (Janet W. Hardy) wrote:
> Quick straw poll here: How many people have ever felt totally,
> completely safe during any S/M scene -- safeword or no, light or heavy,
> D/S or sensation-only?
Verdant:
I hate to muddle the semantics further, but... safe? You mean safe that my
Master won't break my leg or suffocate me to the point of death in a scene?
100%. Period. I know my Master would never cause tha kind of damage.
Safe, as in not getting hurt, or not getting hurt MORE thn I'd LIKE to accept?
Certianly not 100%. Mastercat is always pushing limits, and pushing me to
the edge or slightly farther.
But safe in terms of not getting killed or left in bondage to die alone?
Absolutely 100%. And not only with my own Master, but I feel equally safe
with those other Dom(mes) he has had me play with. Perrrfect <END>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=s70dcvgs3eucqd31n81gqo5e21uj7vvg67%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Sara "The Fist" Salzman - A Compilation of Her Better Known Literary
Works and Opinions
Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 13:35:49 -0500
Message-ID: <s70dcvgs3eucqd31n...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=hpa1uv0m63koaqbo4...@4ax.com&lr=&hl=en
Subject: V2.0b Sara "The Fist" Salzman's Attempt at Revisionism FAILS- She Wrote
The FIST Postings! Date: 17 Dec 2003 19:40:10 GMT
Message-ID: <hpa1uv0m63koaqbo4...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=ige2uvsjk0bfi54at...@4ax.com&lr=&hl=en
Subject: Re: V2.0b Sara "The Fist" Salzman's Attempt at Revisionism FAILS- She
Wrote The FIST Postings! Date: 18 Dec 2003 06:13:32 GMT
Message-ID: <ige2uvsjk0bfi54at...@4ax.com>
Despite overwhelming evidence Sara "The Fist" will keep repeating
her lies and remain in denial.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sara Salzman aka Sara "The Fist" Salzman <cata...@concentric.net> did post:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ssch...@infinet.com
Newsgroups: alt.sex.bondage
Subject: Re: Fist fucking (1)
Message-ID: <sschwartz-110...@p14.infinet.com>
Date: 11 Feb 95 13:19:07 GMT
References: <3hf46h$p...@nyx10.cs.du.edu> <3hg9a1$i...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Organization: InfiNet
Lines: 19
NNTP-Posting-Host: p14.infinet.com
In article <3hg9a1$i...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, lant...@aol.com (L
Antoniou) wrote:
> Perhaps you should read the messages before responding. If you read all
> of mine, you will see that eventually I do suggest the "duck" position -
> all fingers together. What I (and Elf) was responding to was the
> suggestion that one *begin* fisting in that position. Of course, you go
> on to say *exactly that*.
>
In fact, Laura, I did NOT say you should begin in the "duck" position. I
just stated that it was the eventual position to achieve.
I'm sorry if I did not make that clear in my post. I *did* state that fist
fucking was not something I had done very often, and merely wanted to
impart my own (limited) experience. <END>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine the person in these photos assuming the "duck" position
and "fisting" herself!
http://www.westword.com/issues/11209/2/image.gif
http://www.westword.com/issues/11209/4/image.gif
http://groups.google.com/groups?safe=images&ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=0ap6uv43dm8uefmm3...@4ax.com&lr=&hl=en
Subject: Is Sara "The Whipped" Salzman Still Being Whipped by Her Husband's
Electric Whipping Machine?
Message-ID: <0ap6uv43dm8uefmm3...@4ax.com>
Date: 19 Dec 2003 22:00:00 GMT
Tavish The True
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be Beaver Cleaver wrote
>>In one age, called the Second Age by some,
>> (an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
>> someone claiming to be Beaver Cleaver wrote
>> in message <kvi0105uqld85a7d2...@4ax.com>:
>> <snip inapplicable statute>
>>>Yale never served his complaints
>>False. He served them to you,
>False!
Nope. You admitted as much when you boasted of sending them back.
>>entirely properly given that your lawyer had not bothered to file an appearance
>Why should he! He hadn't seen the complaints and he wasn't obliged to file and
>appearance without seeing the complaints!
Ummmm. Yes, he was. Filing an appearance is what tells the court
officially that he was your lawyer. He had no *right* to the
documentation prior to that.
>>and so was not officially your lawyer in the eyes of the court.
>FALSE!
TRUE!
>>You thought it would be so cute to send them back marked "Return to
>>Sender" that not only did you,
>Yale was obligated by th3e rules of professional conduct to furnish them to my
>attorney.
You didn't officially have one until he had filed his appearance.
>Yale was obliged by a written agreement to make NO MORE attempts to
>contact me directly!! THAT IS FACT!
>
>You also being the ignorant bastard you are keep overlooking these pertinent
>facts:
>
>My attorney advised Yale via e-mail (because Yale won't let other people know
>where he lives or how he may be contacted [David Michael's attorney could never
>find lard ass Edeiken either!]) that he, Daylin Leach was representing me and
>that I was his client! Yale initially denied the e-mail agreement of May 29,
>2000 existed and then later said it did and proved I was a liar!
Once again: no appearance filed, no right to any of the
documentation.
<snip the Shame of Belleville once again citing zirself as support
for zir lies>
>Furthermore Yale had posted via his proxy Ken McVay a 30 days notice AFTER the
>lawsuit was dismissed in my favor :
Could not have happened, because the lawsuit was *never* dismissed "in
your favour."
The verdict was overturned on a narrow jurisdictional issue without
prejudice. So
<snip>
>>but you actively boasted of having done so on alt.rev.
>Sure did! Bastard Edeiken kept sending me posts he made which I wouldn't reply
>and his kook rants etc. Re-read that petition above! The court saw it and
>accepted it as fact!!!!!! It was also considered harassment!!!!
Yes, *your* behaviour was considered harassment, the evidence of which
was accepted as fact -- and still is to this day.
>"Even after the defendant is represented by counsel, mail is still sent directly
>to the defendant addressed to "Defendant Bradbury."
That was a completely unsupported claim by your lawyer which was never
acknowledged by the court as anything but a completely unsupported
claim by your lawyer.
>>It should also be noted that Yale has not posted to Usenet in years.
>I am still being defamed and harassed because of that kook lawsuit
You misspelled "...because I keep bringing up the lawsuit which proved
I am a kook and lying about it..."
And "defamed" and "harassed" should be in sneer quotes.
HTH.
>and it is obvious he is coaching you filth!
Really? How do you leap to this delusion?
And I sure am glad you never resort to personal attack, SoB...
>The reason why that perjurer hasn't been heard
>from since is because he got royally slam dunked but what happened to his fat
>ass back then won't compared to what is coming down the pike for him now!
Not even close, on any point immediately above.
>>>and he falsified evidence which is condemned
>>>with: "Falsifying evidence is also generally a criminal offense. Paragraph (a)
>>>applies to evidentiary material generally, including computerized information."
>>Funny that you never bothered to prove that in a court of law...
>NEVER COULD BECAUSE EDEIKEN NEVER PROVIDED THE COMPLAINTS!!!!!
You've admitted this is a lie above -- why do you keep telling it?
Even if you weren't lying about leach having the right to these
documents, any rational person, in receipt of official court
correspondence would forward the same to their lawyer, not be cutesy
with sending it back.
>Funny thing though that the complaints Yale should have served on my attorney
>were posted all over USENET and web sites AFTER that kook lawsuit was dismissed
>in my favor by Sara Salzman and Ken McVay!
Funny how they were and are public domain, meaning that when you lie
about it, it is perfectly legal to quote them in rebuttal.
>> <snip the Shame of Belleville trying to assert that because one set
>> of Usenet posts exist, another set of emails can't possibly, even
>> tho their existence has been accepted as fact in court>
>Because I was not allowed to have my day in court because of an unethical
>attorney who does not follow the rules of civil procedure THOUGH I wanted that
>bastard to re-file or win his appeal so the lawsuit would be re-tried from
>square one!
Why would you want this if you had won the suit as you lie about
having done?
<snip the Shame of Belleville once *again* citing zirself in support
of zir lies>
>>>PERJURY!!
>>Nope. You really should stop abusing legal terms, especially when
>>you cross post to legal groups where they don't know enough to
>>immediately discount everything you say.
>Submitting manufactured evidence to a court of law is PERJURY and that is
>exactly what yale F.Edeiken did! I love how you remain in denial over the
>documented and obvious!
And I love how you keep making this claim but never even tried to
prove it in a court of law.
<snip the Shame of Belleville once *again* trying to assert that
because one set of Usenet posts exist, another set of emails can't
possibly, even tho their existence has been accepted as fact in
court>
>PERJURY!!
Nope.
>>> With regard to Rule 3.4(a), DR 7-109(A) provides that 荘A lawyer shall not
>>>suppress any evidence that he or his client has a legal obligation to reveal . .
>>Nor did Yale.
>He did by not providing complaints to my attorney and also to David Michael's
>attorney!
You didn't officially *have* an attorney until he filed his
appearance, which was *after* the verdict.
>> <snip irrelevant and unproven claims by defending counsel>
>Can't refute them can you Yale?
I thought you thought I was McVay? See -- this is the problem with
lying: you can't keep them straight.
Which part of "unproven" is it that you don't get, SoB?
>>>The key statements above were:
>>... "PETTION," especially when one considers that the final judgement
>>used nothing in this petition.
>>
>>Which is why the Shame of Belleville will not refer to the actual
>>judgement --
>I have been referring to it and it was dismissed along with any and all claims
>of damages-- a fact pinheads like you still won't accept as reality!!
Not the *full* judgement, showing that your lawyer's petition was not
even a consideration in that judgement.
>>it allows zie to pretend zie "won" a lawsuit whose
>>verdict was simply overturned without prejudice on a narrow
>>jurisdictional matter, and whose Findings of Fact remain exactly that.
>>
>> <snip, dealt with above>
>The only reason why those lies were accepted as fact was because I didn't
>respond and the reason why was explained beyond any fault higher up!
Yes, it sure is: you sent them back.
>Personal attacks?
Yes.
>Yale has a deplorable record with the highest court of his
>state yet his perjury against me with many false and libelous accusations was
>the pinnacle of personal attacks!
Keep calling it perjury, SoB -- someone that doesn't know any better
might actually believe you.
>>or anything...
>>
>> <snip censure that SoB has no idea the reason for>\
>Sure do and I have posted it and that PDF file I have invited people to download
>and view shows how much of a coward Yale was about showing up before the highest
>court of his state!!
And which you have no idea the reasons behind.
<again, snip censure that SoB has no idea the reason for>
>>>http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3921e1e6.182032557%40news.newsguy.com&rnum=1
>>>From: doc_t...@NOSPAMmy-deja.com (Doc Tavish)
>>>Subject: CITY ATTORNEY FOUND GUILTY IN ELEVATOR CONFRONTATION
>>>Date: 2000/05/17
>>>Message-ID: <3921e1e6....@news.newsguy.com>
>>Of course, SoB neglects to inform our new viewers that this case was
>>dismissed...
>That is what Yale claimed and everyone who knows about him knows how he lies!
No, that is what the court record shows.
>Also how funny is how you hold "dismissed" in a higher regard in deference to
>Yale than you do my having Yale's kook lawsuit against me "dismissed." Why is
>that Roger? I can prove that lawsuit was dismissed but we only have your say so
>about the criminal conviction against Yale dismissed!
No, you can't, because it wasn't dismissed. The verdict was
overturned with out prejudice. There's a difference.
>>>Yale is also a perjurer who also makes criminal death threats using subpoenaed
>>>information:
>> <snip the Shame of Belleville citing *himself* to support zir
>> libels>
>How am I citing myself when I show the accusations Yale submitted against me and
>then proving they were manufactured evidence? My but you are stupid!
>
>Here is that link which Roger deleted:
>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=&selm=3bmv4vc9u4kh2qs4v84aek0qsbfhb5eul8%404ax.com
>Subject: Test this, David Michael aka Ken McVay's "Edeiken-v-Bradbury.C1" Is
>Filled With Lies and Perjury...
>Message-ID: <3bmv4vc9u4kh2qs4v...@4ax.com>
And who wrote that post? Like I said, citing *yourself*.
>>I think the learned gentlemen and ladies in these legal groups get the
>>idea. Each of these libels has been addressed, only to be
>>regurgitated ad nauseum by the Shame of Belleville under a variety of
>>nyms designed exclusively to avoid kill filters.
>>
>>Now zie is boasting that zie is initiating proceedings again Yale. I
>>really hope this isn't yet another of SoB's empty claims -- I'd
>>really, *really* like to observe him dealing with the kettle of fish
>>zie'd be opening...
>Yale is in for a very big surprise and oh how you defenders of a shyster will be
>humiliated!
You keep making all these grand threats, but at the end of the day you
remain the most impotent liar on Usenet. It must really suck being
you...
Sara Salzman
Beaver Cleaver <beaver_cleaver@mayfield01net> wrote:
SNIP Mr. Bradbury's FORGED, ALTERED, and LYING IDIOCY
But it sure is nice he doesn't engage in personal attacks like:
"Personal attack is all your kind has."
"My name is not Bradshit you god damned cock sucker!"
"My name is not Bradshit you hooked nosed kike"
"Now go fist yourself hook nose"
"Why don't you ever accept my challenge you dick licker?"
Why won't you accept my challenge you dick nibbler?
Drop dead you Jew Kike bastard! Take the chalenge you big mouth hook nose
Didn't you mean Her Fatness as in your lard assed wife?
He's not a 'groid- he's a hook nosed kike!
Why don't you accept my challenge you filthy hook nosed kike bastard?
you stupid Jewish bitch!
My name is not Bradshit you god damned cock sucker!
For the sake of speculation- say that this piece of hog fat was alive
when the
nazis were allegedly making soap and candles from Jews-- what do you
think the
nazis would get from this sow and her fat globules?
NOW GO FIOST YOURSELF YOU FILTHY WHORE!
Now go fist yourself or engage in some of that "safe torture" posted
about
before you perverted lying filthy whore!
--
Sara Salzman
Beaver Cleaver <beaver_cleaver@mayfield01net> wrote:
"Yale got his default judgment on August 25, 2000"
It's now almost February of 2004.
GROW UP.
If you "won," as you claim (dismissed without prejudice isn't winning),
stop harping on a four year old case and GROW UP.
Sara
Wally
<catamont-0D6529...@news-60.giganews.com> Sara Salzman
<cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
>In article <g6h1105sr8d4pllql...@4ax.com>,
> Beaver Cleaver <beaver_cleaver@mayfield01net> wrote:
>
>"Yale got his default judgment on August 25, 2000"
Which was overturned when the lawsuit (and damages award) was dismissed
in my favor!
CLERK OF COURTS OF LEHIGH COUNTY - CIVIL DIVISION
Lehigh County Courthouse
455 W. Hamilton Street
Allentown, PA 18101-1614
RE: Edeiken Vs Bradbury 1999-C-2786
Partial text of letter from Judge Reibman:
<START>
Copies of this order were mailed to all counsel of record and pro se litigants.
CC: Counsel for Plaintiff (Yale F. Edeiken): Yale F. Edeiken Esq.
Counsel for Defendant (Scott Bradbury) : Daylin B. Leach Esq.
ORDER
AND NOW, this 12th day of June, 2001, upon consideration of Defendant's
Petition for Relief from Judgment, filed on September 22, 2000,
Plaintiff's response thereto, and argument thereon on February 7, 2001,
IT IS ORDERED said petition is GRANTED, and the case is DISMISSED.
[...]
BY THE COURT:
(Signed) Edward J. Reibman, J.
<STOP>
Looks like the court ruled in my favor to me! Yale even lost his appeal as well!
Looks like I was victorious twice!
<START>
September 26, 2001
Yale F. Edeiken
918 N Bayard Street
Allentown, PA 18104-3759
RE: Yale F. Edeiken, Appellant v. Scott Bradbury et al
1714 EDA 2001
Dear Mr. Edeiken:
This is to advise that the attached Order has been entered in the
above- captioned matters.
A Certified Copy of this Order together with the record will be
sent to the Prothonotary of Lehigh County in due course.
Very truly yours,
(Signed)
David A. Szewczak
Prothonotary
DAS/dag
Attachment
CC: Daylin B. Leach, Esquire
Scott Bradbury
Honorable Edward D. Reibman
The Attachment:
<Start>
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Eastern District Office
Yale F. Edeiken APPELLANT No. 1714 EDA 2001
V.
Scott Bradbury Et Al C.P. Civil Lehigh County
99-C-2786
ORDER
AND NOW, this 26th day of September, 2001, the within
appeal is DISMISSED for failure to file a brief."
PER CURIAM
<STOP>
The prudent question to why Yale failed to file his brief is answered in this
archive which shows his motive for legal system abuse and how serious he was NOT
in litigating me!
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=sq4v2us0odig5nhq79f6crk7a2e7lsqh1s%404ax.com&rnum=6&filter=0
Subject: Why Yale F. Edeiken LOST His Appeal..
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 17:30:59 -0600
Message-ID: <sq4v2us0odig5nhq7...@4ax.com>
>It's now almost February of 2004.
SO WHAT!! Criminal acts were perpetrated against me and justice still hasn't
been served upon the perpetrator! If you want me to forget the numerous wrongs
done against me three years ago then by your own standards you need to stop
squawking about the "holocaust" which was over 60 years ago.
I am going to get justice one way or another and I have many more legal avenues
to achieve it. Tell Yale I will be relentless and I am not going let up until he
is disbarred and his license revoked!
>GROW UP
Me GROW UP?! I was willing to let the matter drop and was trying to make peace
BUT you and Ken McVay saw fit to post that lawsuit everywhere and it is at more
than one web site and it is continually thrust up into my face as if it still
has merit! The accusations were false and libelous and some were outright
fabrications PLUS my own personal safety is jeopardized seeing how Ken McVay
tells everyone where I live in his web site version of that lawsuit!
You liars and offspring of the Devil need to grow up and accept the fact Yale is
unethical and unscrupulous and he lied profusely! You need to accept the fact
Yale lost not one BUT two lawsuits! Remember he sued David E. Michael and lost
that lawsuit as well and he did David Michael and his attorney the same exact
way he did my attorney and myself in that he never showed cause and served
complaints or as David Michael put it so eloquently:
[...]
Xref:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=&selm=aomv4vofhbl2q46bqk2lvf3k7q0umn1l4l%404ax.com
Subject: RE Dismissal of 1999-C-2786 Edeiken Vs Bradbury R_0216
Message-ID: <aomv4vofhbl2q46bq...@4ax.com>
What Yale did to me which he didn't try on David (which denied me my day in
court to refute his evil false trumped up accusations):
Filed September 22, 2000
PETTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT
COMES NOW, the defendant, Scott Bradbury, by and through his counsel Daylin B.
Leach, Esquire, to petition this honorable court for Relief from Judgment,
pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 237.3. In support of this petition, the defendant avers
the following:
On August 25, 2000, the Plaintiff filed a Praecipe for Default Judgment with
this court. A true and correct copy of which is hereto and marked as "Exhibit
A."
Since a complaint has never been filed or served, the defendant is unable to
attach a copy of preliminary objections he would file if the judgment was opened
pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 237.3 (a).
" ...When attorney Leach asked Mr. Edeiken for a copy of
the complaint when he first becomes involved in the case, he is told "Fuck You"
via e-mail. In plain English, this is not a lawsuit, it is a bizarre war waged
by Mr. Edeiken on a man he has never met. The court should not be a party to
this."
Respectfully submitted
Daylin B. Leach Esquire
<END>
IOW I was not given my right to due process by Edeiken to defend myself from his
numerous documented perjurious accusations and some are detailed here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=&selm=ja362v4amltqohp97uo053rju5erbf80qr%404ax.com
Subject: Ken McVay's "Edeiken-v-Bradbury.C1" Is Filled With Lies and Perjury...
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:23:54 -0600
Message-ID: <ja362v4amltqohp97...@4ax.com>
Though Yale did have this posted numerous times AFTER the lawsuit was dismissed
in my favor:
<start/quote>
Archive/File: people/b/bradbury.scott/Edeiken-v-Bradbury-RA.01
Last-Modified: 2001/02/14
REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION
NOW COMES Plaintiff Yale F. Edeiken and demands that, pursuant to Rule
4014, Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant Scott Bradbury
admit or deny the truth of the following within thirty (30) days of service
or, by failing to do so, admit the truth of the matters asserted:
Notice the phrase: "Defendant Scott Bradbury admit or deny the truth of the
following within thirty (30) days of service or, by failing to do so, admit the
truth of the matters asserted:
<end/quote>
THOSE COMPLAINTS WERE NEVER SERVED!!! THAT IS FACT!!
Yale F. Edeiken proved via the docket he knew I had an attorney when he issued a
subpoena on him (from the Docket printout):
"July 14, 2000 PLTF'S NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE A SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE
DOCUMENTS AND THINGS FOR DISCOVERY UPON DAYLIN LEACH. AFDT OF SERVICE
ATTACHED." This is on the docket of Edeiken Vs Bradbury 1999-C-2786
I was given 30 days to refute the false accusations BUT Yale did not serve the
complaints on my attorney! August 25, 2000 - 30 days = about July 27, 2000!
Why didn't Yale serve those complaints on my attorney as he was required by a
written agreement and the rules of civil procedure to do! Also the time span
between Yale subpoenaing my attorney on July 14, 2000 to his date of (temporary)
default judgment of August 25, 2000 is about 43 days! So I ask why didn't Yale
follow the rules of civil procedure?
> If you "won," as you claim (dismissed without prejudice isn't winning),
Not being obligated to a damages award and Yale losing his appeal and not
wanting to try his lawsuit again in my jurisdiction or anywhere for that matter
and then leaving USENET and not posting since then is me winning you fat
disgusting pig!
Yale knew if that lawsuit went back to square one his perjury would have been
exposed and that he would have done some real time behind bars for not only
perjury but for his death threats and his obscene call!
Care to deny I posted this way back:
<END>
Attention Defendant Bradshit
----- Original Message -----
Xref:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=sq4v2us0odig5nhq79f6crk7a2e7lsqh1s%404ax.com&rnum=6&filter=0
Subject: Why Yale F. Edeiken LOST His Appeal..
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 17:30:59 -0600
Message-ID: <sq4v2us0odig5nhq7...@4ax.com>
Anyone who doubts Sara Salzman is a fat disgusting lying pig need only see this
picture: http://www.westword.com/issues/11209/4/image.gif
>stop harping on a four year old case and GROW UP.
As long as I am still being defamed by it, and as long as it is constantly
thrust up into my face weekly as if it has merit, as long as it is still at web
sites and incites hatred against me and gives out where I live then I won't shut
up!
I am not the one who needs to GROW UP! I want justice as anyone else who has
been wronged and criminally harassed by a bunch of evil liars and devils!
Take my word for it you fat pig- I am not letting up and when I finally have
justice meted out on Yale then I am going to hold your fat ass responsible for
your perjurious defamations! I am waiting on a copy of your "affidavit" to find
out what jurisdiction you filed your "false swearings" in.
BTW stop whining about the holocaust- that was long ago and most of the people
who were alive when it happened are dead BUT you Jews still harass and harangue
current day Germans for acts they didn't commit much less were alive when the
acts were committed!
IOW it is Okay for jews to want revenge but is childish for a Goy to want
justice for evil acts concocted against him by Children of the Devil
anti-Christs. The Devil is the Fatehr of Lies and Jesus said the lying Jews of
his day were the Children of the Devil and Jews were labeled first as
anti-Christs for denying Jesus was the foretold Messiah! care to deny the
scriptural proofs you liar?
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=vd01cvsh9ta3ep7b3crfru9ce2rb0snnls%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Children of the Devil and Anti-Christ[s] Positively Identified Using
Scripture-- Check The Proofs For Yourselves! V2.0
Message-ID: <vd01cvsh9ta3ep7b3...@4ax.com>
Date: 13 May 2003 05:29:00 GMT
Do you or do you not accept:
1) Jesus is the Christ or Messiah?
2) Confess Jesus Christ as having come in the flesh
I don't care if you do or not and you have the freedom to be a Pharisee BUT you
Pharisees won't be allowed to get away with your lies and evil machinations! You
devils haven't changed in 2000 years! When you can't refute your opponents with
false charges to civil authorities all the way up to plotting violence and
murder!
I.E.
-- The Apostle Paul says much about Pharisaic Jews in two Bible scriptures:
1 Thessalonians 2:14,15 (English-NIV):
14 For you, brothers, became imitators of God's churches in Judea,
which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own countrymen the
same things those churches suffered from the Jews,
15 who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out.
They displease God and are hostile to all men.
Notice the fine points made by the Apostle Paul in just
two verses of scripture!
He brought out in just two verses:
1) "those churches suffered from the Jews" Those sweet harmless
little Jews were committing "hate crimes" against Christians!
2) "the Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus" The Apostle Paul was not the least bit
bashful about telling people "who killed the Lord Jesus" which the Churches of
Christendom won't do!
3) "They displease God.." The Temple is still in ruins as a testament
to that fact! Undeniable wouldn't you say? And last BUT certainly not
least by any stretch of the imagination:
4) "They (Jews) are hostile to all men."
Regarding "2) "the Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus" The Apostle Paul was
not the least bit bashful about telling people "who killed the Lord Jesus"
which the Churches of Christendom won't do!" see this archive:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=m1p5nv4es86j78p5dr5pe41l8pi3vfcst0%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: UPDATED The Most Heinous Murder Plot Ever Devised (For Your Archives &
Research) V2.5 Message-ID: <m1p5nv4es86j78p5d...@4ax.com>
Date: 25 Sep 2003 13:23:49 GMT
I might as well throw this in seeing how I mentioned "Hate Crimes."
Historically, who do most people think were more brutal- Nazis or
Pharisees?
(One example) Persecution and torture:
Matthew 23:34 (English-RSV)
[Jesus warned] "Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of
whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues and
persecute from town to town...." [Tavish comment: The words just stated were
addressed to the Jewish Pharisee Rabbis!]
[To scourge means to lash or whip severely. Imagine Jews chasing people from
town to town and flogging them in their Jewish synagogues! I don't think even
the Nazis rounded up Jews and flogged them in Christian Churches!! What Jews
did happened and it is documented in the Bible for all to see! Tavish]
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=i31ucv4nvr6ehh6r2jgq8d7orrpfhm3j09%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: The Apostle Paul on Judaized Jews R_0524
Message-ID: <i31ucv4nvr6ehh6r2...@4ax.com>
Date: 24 May 2003 05:30:25 GMT
When the numerous blinded and beguiled adherents of Christendom wise up then the
game will be over for you Pharisees! I see you devils for what you are BUT they
are still misled thinking you devils are still God's Chosen Children which is an
outright lie which contradicts what 1st Century (The True Christianity unstained
by apostasy and doctrines of wolves in sheep's clothing).
I.E.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=1ioifv01joma9fjqpa361host2smg0un2n%404ax.com&rnum=2
Subject: Today's Judaism is the Same Stuff Jesus Condemned ~2000 Years Ago
(Which Has Had Some Additions Made Since Then) V3.0 R_0625
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 03:51:27 -0500
Message-ID: <1ioifv01joma9fjqp...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=qf7acvoa8hfn3bi2fttrvo00fhaoi2f8ip%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Old Covenant Vs New -- New Covenant Replaces Old Covenant (Jews NO
Longer God's Chosen People & Entitled to "Israel" So Says the Scripture!)
Message-ID: <qf7acvoa8hfn3bi2f...@4ax.com>
>Sara
Tavish The True
How First Century Christianity Was Treated by Jews:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=m1p5nv4es86j78p5dr5pe41l8pi3vfcst0%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: UPDATED The Most Heinous Murder Plot Ever Devised (For Your Archives &
Research) V2.5 R_0925
Message-ID: <m1p5nv4es86j78p5d...@4ax.com>
Date: 25 Sep 2003 13:23:49 GMT
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=k11ucvc1j4hl6s7av6qpr9882esa96oaav%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Babylon the Great - Religious Persecution, Torture, Harassment R_0524
Message-ID: <k11ucvc1j4hl6s7av...@4ax.com>
Date: 24 May 2003 05:30:17 GMT
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=i31ucv4nvr6ehh6r2jgq8d7orrpfhm3j09%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: The Apostle Paul on Judaized Jews R_0524
Message-ID: <i31ucv4nvr6ehh6r2...@4ax.com>
Date: 24 May 2003 05:30:25 GMT
The first "Holocaust" was not Gentiles (Nazis) Against Jews
BUT was Jews (Communists) Against Christian Kulaks!!!
How Later Christianity was/is treated by Jews:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=upe9kvor1pdvm2ifa8sfa0qfboa6ull055%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Comparing Israel's "Anti-Christ Activism" to Other Middle East Nations
is NOT a Valid Comparison V2.5 R_0821
Message-ID: <upe9kvor1pdvm2ifa...@4ax.com>
Date: 21 Aug 2003 12:22:34 GMT
Jewish Led Bolsheviks Scalped & Crucified Christians by Philippa Fletcher
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=34c17d0f.1410012285%40news.smart1.net&rnum=7
Subject: Bolsheviks Scalped and Crucified Christians -
Date: 1998/01/18
Message-ID: <34c17d0f....@news.smart1.net>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=kbh100p214fshve3pk9qdcpqqhcdib07t5%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Post-Soviet Religion (What Communists did to Christians) Newly
Expanded 09-21-2003 S_0110
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:53:04 -0600
Message-ID: <kbh100p214fshve3p...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=u626vv814v0dt9raqv17ede0h4536l51ag%404ax.com&rnum=10&filter=0
Subject: V3.0e Forefathers of the Soviet State and Anti-Christ Communism R_1231
Message-ID: <u626vv814v0dt9raq...@4ax.com>
Date: 31 Dec 2003 17:34:02 GMT
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=ncu5gvoc1nga0k933sgt0sbtglrv1nlb4e%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Communist Holocaust Has Killed Over 100 Million People
Message-ID: <ncu5gvoc1nga0k933...@4ax.com>
Date: 2 Jul 2003 15:33:38 GMT
Holocausts Jews have waged against non-Jews and Jewish denial of their
Holocausts against Christians/non-Jews:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=5rhktv483m9oofgqt8goir93o4pm08ht49%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: UPDATED: 3 Major Jewish Organizations Engage in Holocaust Denial in
Addition to Their anti-Christic Christ Denial anti-Christism
Message-ID: <5rhktv483m9oofgqt...@4ax.com>
Date: 12 Dec 2003 22:57:48 GMT
Patrick Humphrey
>On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 06:54:48 -0700,
><catamont-0D6529...@news-60.giganews.com> Sara Salzman
><cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
>>In article <g6h1105sr8d4pllql...@4ax.com>,
>> Beaver Cleaver <beaver_cleaver@mayfield01net> wrote:
>>"Yale got his default judgment on August 25, 2000"
>Which was overturned when the lawsuit (and damages award) was dismissed
>in my favor!
The suit was dismissed *without prejudice*, Fatbury. That means you didn't
win, and neither did Yale. Are you ever going to get around to coherently
explaining why, if you supposedly WON this case, you're refiling it?
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2003-04 Houston Aeros)
Patrick Keenan
news:phm21011l6fdi11m0...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 06:54:48 -0700,
> <catamont-0D6529...@news-60.giganews.com> Sara Salzman
> <cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <g6h1105sr8d4pllql...@4ax.com>,
> > Beaver Cleaver <beaver_cleaver@mayfield01net> wrote:
> >
> >"Yale got his default judgment on August 25, 2000"
>
> Which was overturned when the lawsuit (and damages award) was dismissed
> in my favor!
No, it was not. "without prejucice means that nobody lost, and nobody won.
It's not in *anybody's* favour.
And certainly, it wasn't in your favour, since the statements your attorney
failed to challenge were accepted..
-pk
Wally Cleaver
<pat...@io.com> wrote:
>Fatbury
--To those people who can only hurl obese or fat insults I offer
the $10,000.00 Challenge for Edeikenites Who Won't Admit Yale Lied!
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=5oimrvs7agr9m92kj3q74a22vba99coeos%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: The $10,000 Challenge to Ken McVay aka Re: Harold Covington & Scott
Bradbury: The Blubberbury Twins
Message-ID: <5oimrvs7agr9m92kj...@4ax.com>
References: <bpe9d...@enews3.newsguy.com>
Date: 19 Nov 2003 11:29:26 GMT
Original challenge was made: Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 11:23:17 GMT
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=4q0pbtc3gk6oour5opkjkj1q00geehk9n3%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Yale F. Edeiken Making False Claims About My Medical Records...
Message-ID: <4q0pbtc3gk6oour5o...@4ax.com>
"NEW CHALLENGE: I will offer $1000.00 to anyone who will step up and
substantiate what Yale F. Edeiken claimed in his post about my Hermann
Hospital discharge diagnosis numbered 50 04882 6 9356."
Roger
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
in message <a1631092jskv66to0...@4ax.com>:
>>Fatbury
>--To those people who can only hurl obese or fat insults I offer
>the $10,000.00 Challenge for Edeikenites Who Won't Admit Yale Lied!
Accepted. Post proof that the $10k has been deposited in escrow with
appropriate instructions for release, and I will post the proof
required.
(watch the Blubberbury run, folks)
Patrick Humphrey
>On 23 Jan 2004 12:53:16 -0600, <szkad4e...@fnord.io.com> Patrick Humphrey
><pat...@io.com> wrote:
>>Fatbury
>--To those people who can only hurl obese or fat insults I offer
>the $10,000.00 Challenge for Edeikenites Who Won't Admit Yale Lied!
Where's your proof of having $10,000? (For that matter, do you even have
10,000 Turkish lira?)
Patrick Keenan
news:a1631092jskv66to0...@4ax.com...
> On 23 Jan 2004 12:53:16 -0600, <szkad4e...@fnord.io.com> Patrick
Humphrey
> <pat...@io.com> wrote:
>
> >Fatbury
>
> --To those people who can only hurl obese or fat insults I offer
> the $10,000.00 Challenge for Edeikenites Who Won't Admit Yale Lied!
Do you actually have the money for this "challenge" you offer? Yes or no?
-pk
Joebruno
> Wally Cleaver <wally_cleaver@mayfield01net> writes:
>
> >On 23 Jan 2004 12:53:16 -0600, <szkad4e...@fnord.io.com> Patrick Humphrey
> ><pat...@io.com> wrote:
>
> >>Fatbury
>
> >--To those people who can only hurl obese or fat insults I offer
> >the $10,000.00 Challenge for Edeikenites Who Won't Admit Yale Lied!
>
> Where's your proof of having $10,000? (For that matter, do you even have
> 10,000 Turkish lira?)
Fatboy has a Monopoly game and the stupid slob thinks the money in it is real.
Joebruno
>
> >On 23 Jan 2004 12:53:16 -0600, <szkad4e...@fnord.io.com> Patrick Humphrey
> ><pat...@io.com> wrote:
>
> >>Fatbury
>
> >--To those people who can only hurl obese or fat insults I offer
> >the $10,000.00 Challenge for Edeikenites Who Won't Admit Yale Lied!
>
> Where's your proof of having $10,000? (For that matter, do you even have
> 10,000 Turkish lira?)
He might have 10,000 fleas, but, in view of his endless blood supply,
they are unlikely to leave him for another host.