6 posts tagged “washington”

Before I begin, I should note that this story does not have a response from the Clintons directly, but it makes very disturbing viewing. As Peter Paul says in the first part, the case against the Clintons is proceeding, dealing with a massive election fraud, but there is nothing in the media about it. At the end of Part One, Mr Paul shows a video that demonstrates Mrs Clinton was in full knowledge of the campaign contributions that were raised for her by him and his organization.
   Equal Justice Foundation of America, which presents the documentary, calls the incident ‘most shocking expose on the blatant corruption surrounding Hillary Clinton. Includes exclusive home videos of Hillary to expose the illegalities that elected Hillary to the Senate and the obstructions of justice that keep her there.’ One commentator believes that Sen. Clinton has committed a felony punishable by five years’ jail time.
   Let us say this is not beyond the realm of imagination and needs to be considered fairly.

The Washington Post knows a good blogging story when it sees one. Marc Fisher has updated his blog after the second day of the crazy judge and the missing pants saga.
   I’m sure it has crossed more than a few minds: a future where all news articles come via blogs. Scary. Though at least there are some professional journos making a good job of it.
   But it sounds like Christopher Manning, representing Custom Cleaners, is on the right track. As Mr Fisher reports:

Pearson told the defense lawyer that if the tables were turned and he were in the place of the Chung family, the owners of the Northeast Washington cleaners who purportedly lost Pearson's pants, he would have immediately written a check for $1,150—the replacement value of the Hickey Freeman suit to which the pants belonged—to provide the satisfaction that the store's “Satisfaction Guaranteed” sign promised.
   It took more than 10 minutes and numerous attempts by both Manning and Judge Judith Bartnoff to get Pearson to answer a question about whether anyone has the right to walk into any cleaners and claim $1,150 simply by saying that their suit had been lost. Finally, Pearson said that the law requires that “The merchant would have an obligation to honor their demand.“
   “So your answer is Yes?” Manning asked.
   “Yes,” Pearson said.
   The courtroom, in which it's hard to discern any support for Pearson except from his mother and her friend, broke up in laughter. Derisive laughter.
   Manning pushed ahead: Does Pearson believe that people should interpret signs “in a reasonable way?”
   “Depends on the circumstances,” Pearson said.
   Asked to answer yes or no, Pearson said, “No.”

   I have to agree with Mr Fisher’s thoughts about the presiding judge: ‘This is known as giving someone all the rope they need to hang themselves.’

Just to show how distraught he is at having the wrong trousers which necessitated him to sue a hard-working Korean couple for $54 million, Judge Roy Pearson burst into tears in court today.
   Ah, so he’s not just a vindictive prick: I happen to share the Chungs’ attorney’s viewpoint here.
   My opinion: what a goddamn phoney. It’s not like the trousers were being controlled by an evil penguin or rooster or something.
   I hope that all dry-cleaners in the Chungs’ region have little signs of Judge Pearson in their shops with, ‘Do not serve this vindictive bastard’.
   The Judge may find, to his surprise, that signs in consumer law are to be interpreted through the eyes of the reasonable person, not unreasonable, over-the-top, over-the-hill, overreacting morons, and that the quantum of damages is likely limited by that.
   Not everyone is as vindictive as he is, certainly not his colleagues on the bench who will feel this man has made a mockery of everything the US justice system is meant to stand for.

Got this in the feedback form from my main site last night, from the law firm representing a Mom-and-Pop dry-cleaning outfit. If you recall, a Korean family was being sued for $65 million by an American judge because they lost his favourite pants. It looks like they are about to have their day in court, with an amended claim from the judge after outcries. Still, he wants $54 million—that’s some amendment.
   I’ll post more if Manning & Sossamon inform me of developments. My best wishes go to Jin Nam Chung and Ki Chung. No prizes for guessing what I want to happen, especially to Judge Pearson. I think I share most people’s feelings, especially those Americans who feel Judge Pearson is giving their entire nation a bad name.

Update: $67 Million Dry Cleaning Case

On May 31, 2007, D.C. Administrative Law Judge, Roy L. Pearson, filed a Pre-Trial Brief in the Pearson v. Chung dry cleaner case. In the brief, Pearson shifts the focus of his claims from his allegedly lost pants to claims related to signage in the Chungs’ store. One sign reads “Satisfaction Guaranteed” and another reads “Same Day Service.” Pearson claims the signs are somehow misleading and apparently continues to seek over $54,000,000 in damages from the Chungs. Pearson had previously sought $67,000,000 in compensation from the Chungs.
   Christopher Manning, of the law firm Manning & Sossamon in Washington D.C., represents the Chungs and made the following statement in response to Pearson's recent actions:

"Although it is always encouraging to see claims withdrawn, it is simply baffling that Mr. Pearson continues to assert that he is entitled to tens of millions of dollars as a result of two completely harmless, completely straight-forward signs. Mr. Pearson's claims are not founded in common sense and are extraordinarily abusive towards the Chungs. As a result, the Chungs' terrible ordeal continues. The Chungs' decision to move to and build a business in America began with the classic American dream. Mr. Pearson has turned that dream into an American nightmare."

Mr. Pearson's lawsuit has cost the Chungs tens of thousands of dollars in defense costs. Donations to a defense fund set up by the Chungs may be made at www.customcleanersdefensefund.com.
   This case will be tried in courtroom 415 of the District of Columbia Superior Courthouse on June 11th and 12th beginning at 9:30am each day.
   All questions regarding the matter should be directed to the office of Manning & Sossamon at:

Manning & Sossamon PLLC
1532 Sixteenth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 387-2228 (voice)
(202) 387-2229 (fax)
chungdefense@manning-sossamon.com

I am generally happy to watch many of the 1970s’ cop shows or even movies. It’s probably why I love Life on Mars so much.
   Now, with the American version coming, I hear it’s going to be set in Los Angeles. Now, if you have seen any cop show from the 1970s, LA then kind of looks like LA now, at least to us foreigners.
   Here’s my suggestion: model the American Gene Hunt on Lt Lon McQ (presumably McHugh?), John Wayne’s Irish–American character from McQ (1974) and set it in Seattle: the 1972 (the Yanks are going to set their version a year earlier) version bears little resemblance to the 2007 Microsoft-tinged one. Plenty of jokes can abound about the internet or Bill Gates, and we all know we like Bill Gates jokes (sorry, Bill). That movie had groovy music from Elmer Bernstein. It was basically a western (directed by John [Magnificent Seven] Sturges) involving cars, guns and dope.
   Only one clip on YouTube, but here it is, with the Duke in all his bad-ass, junk-pusher-killing glory.