Dealing with vexatious litigants: Parker, Sloan

In article C47ADB10.129956%akaufmann@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Alex
<akaufmann@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>gordon roy parker wrote:
>
>> By involving itself in this case, however, those who post to this
thread can
>> and may very well find themselves involved in discovery to ascertain
their
>> motives for misleading others and attempting to affect the outcome of
this
>> case.
>
>In a thread about your distinct LACK of success in court, you thought it
a
>good idea to threaten more people with legal action?
>
>You really are a mess, fr00t l00p.
>
>Get help... before it's too late.

Gordon Roy Parker serves a useful purpose.  The activities of people like
him,
Sloan and others (only a few hundred) have been noted at the very highest
levels of the Department of Justice - I, for one, have written to or
phoned
Justice about the abuse.  Alex et al, do so too.

Parker and Sloan will leave just one artifact behind, just one monument to
each
of their miserable existences.  It is coming, and coming momentarily.

That is a toughening up of the law relating to vexatious litigants.  The
number
of strikes such l00ns are allowed before they get permanently
legally-neutered
is going to be enormously reduced.  At present, there is no limit per se,
it is
decided ad hoc.  Under the rules that should be introduced and be in force
by
2010, whatever is the administration at that time, the effect on both
l00ns
would be immediate.  They will both be classified as vexatious from day
one.

In effect, the proposed change will have retrospective effect, so existing
case
histories are taken into the reckoning.  The proposed formula involves
both
the
number of lost cases (including throw-outs) and the pro****tion of total
cases
that have been lost.  So just because a legal person (human or not) has
lost,
say, 5 cases will not be an automatic bar, provided he has also won, say,
3.
Certain types of case will not count, and foreign cases will not count. 
At
the
court's discretion, where the abuse of process has been more egregious,
there
is still a way for the abuser to be sanctioned even if the formula does
not
mandate this.  No need for this discretion with either l00n, as according
to
the proposed formula they both qualify as vexatious.  Even if the formula
gets
relaxed prior to finalization, judgment-proof l00ns like these are exactly
the
type a court is likely to discretionarily sanction.

Please use search on the DOJ webpage to find the discussion do***ent and
use
the feedback form to provide comments ("widen the catchment area to
include
more of these serial litigants and abusers" is mine).

Once the new rules come into force, both the l00ns will be prevented from
making any further filings of any nature without the explicit advance
consent
of a designated court.  Which they will not get.  Open season, then. 
There
is no provision for unsanctioning, so once you are in the box, you stay
in.

I still think the law will be too lax.  Vexatious litigants have brought
our
judicial system to its knees, cluttering up the courts to the detriment of
bona fide users, so after they reach a certain level, a bounty should be
put
on their heads.  If they are even found near a court (except when being
sued
or prosecuted)....

Enjoy your last 20 months, l00ns.  It will be our turn, then, and boy oh
boy
do the people you have abused intend to revenge themselves.  Roll on 2010.