AnatomyofaFraud.com
Appeals Court 12/23/13 RULING
The Factually Erroneous Findings of the Massachusetts Appeals Court, December 23, 2013 Ruling:
There’s a single statement, a key factual conclusion that the Appeals Court got wrong,
that tells you Everything
you need to know about this scam!
“after the agreement was executed, CCTimes began to sell internet advertising in
a “bundle” with print
advertising, charging a discounted rate for the internet advertising”.
“AFTER” P&S, REALLY? You Mean January 9, 2003? -
IF ONLY THAT WERE REMOTELY POSSIBLE.. It’s not.
CCT’s Ad Manager said CCT had Bundles in 2002 + CCT Internet Manager said CCT had
Bundles in 2000 + President Claimed he did not know which year they began +
CCT Controller
skipped deposition under the threat of sanctions + NM&F admitted $73,000 in 2002
Bundles + H&K said Bundles were “disclosed and presented” in 2002 + Archive.org shows
CCT marketing 2002 Bundles + Sept 2013 Email shows Mgt Split 2002 Bundle Revenue
to 1/10th of 1% + CCT Claimed a existing “Bundle Policy” -
So did these CCT executives lie?, Did both law firms lie?, Is the Internet Lying?, Was the Sept 2003 email Fake?, The “Policy” Fake?, The Smoking Gun Fake?
To the Honorable 3 Member Panel who signed this ruling on 12/23/13, January 9, 2003 is Fake! (12/24 I was accepted in the NY Clinical Trial, 12/25 was Xmas. nice run)
So HOW is it these experienced lawyers caused the Courts to fall for January 9, 2003
just as their client caused ME to fall for it in 2002 -
The
Evidence couldn't be more factually definitive if I were a legal scholar, And not
a broke pro se litigant fighting the likes of News Corp.
The ONLY ones who even claimed CCT could not have hidden plans to Bundle in 2002, because they began in Jan 2003, Are lawyers. Everyone else admitted 2002 Bundles.
ACTUALLY, the RECORD shows BOTH Law Firms Vouched for Bundles Being Conceived on Jan 9, 2003. And BOTH Law Firms swore they were in place in 2002!
Ah.. My 2013 Appellate Reply Brief had a photo of CCT’s 2002 Smoking Gun Bundle Plans which Count $73,000 in the SAME Bundles they claim to invent January 9, 2003!
Below, in Mt. Ivy Press v. Defonseca, Honorable Justice Wolohojian writes about a pro se litigant having perpetrated a fraud upon the court, HER Court. Her Honor notes that while typically a crime committed BY Officers Of The Court (lawyers), “we are unprepared to say that Pro se litigants are in all circumstances Insulated from committing fraud upon the Court”.
Her Honor ALSO signed the Ruling above, Fontaine V Cape Cod Times, on 12/23/13 “after the agreement was executed, CCTimes began to sell internet advertising in a Bundle…”
Respectfully, That is factually and demonstrably Incorrect. The Jan 9, 03 Evidence lawyers sold you is FAKE. Lawyers Lied to You., And should under NO circumstances be insulated.
The Entire December 23, 2013 Appeals Court Ruling. *Searchable through online sources.
