URGENT! Free the Fraud-Buster Four -- LEGAL FUND NEEDS HELP NOW!

[demodonkey]

THIS IS URGENT! Please keep this kicked and kicked hard!

A LEGAL FUND HAS BEEN SET UP for the "Fraud-Buster Four" Robert Fitrakis, Susan Truitt, Cliff Arnebeck and Peter Peckarsky. Word is that each of these brave patriot attorneys could face a personal fine of up to $100,000 (which would NOT be covered by malpractice or any other insurance!) This is an outrageous partisan attack against their First Amendment rights and nothing less than an attempt to suppress all of us who would fight for fair elections in the future! These courageous fraud-fighters need to assemble a crack legal team to help them face the GOP-controlled Ohio Supreme Court (and to help them keep getting our message out!) PLEASE HELP NOW!

TO DONATE go to
http://freepress.org/store.php#donate

Scroll down to:
Ohio Sanctions Defense Fund and DONATE USING PAYPAL

Donations to CICJ are tax deductible.
If you prefer, you can make out a check to the
"Columbus Institute for Contemporary Journalism"
(make a note that donation is for the Ohio Sanctions Defense Fund) and send it to:

The Free Press
1240 Bryden Road
Columbus, Ohio 43205

----------

From the votecobb.org site 1/26/05
http://www.votecobb.org/#recount

Free the Fraud-buster Four!

Initial filings are due on Friday in the case filed by Ohio's Republican Attorney General to try to sanction and fine the so-called "Fraud-buster Four." These four courageous Election Protection attorneys dared to file lawsuits challenging the "irregularities" in Ohio during Election 2004, so the attempt to sanction them is widely viewed as an attempt to chill the First Amendment rights of the attorneys and, by extension, their supporters. Rep. John Conyers has sent a strong letter expressing concerns to the originator of the GOP counter-attack, Attorney General Jim Petro. Your help is needed to donate money and file affidavits supportive of the Fraud-buster Four in the next two days.

----------

[SmileMaker]

1. This should be a headline news story! What PLANET are we on?!

[SnoopDog]

2. Arn't they...

a crack legal team?

"These courageous fraud-fighters need to assemble a crack legal team to help them face the GOP-controlled Ohio Supreme Court (and to help them keep getting our message out!) PLEASE HELP NOW!"

[demodonkey]

3. They need help. Pretty hard to defend yourself no matter who you are. nt

[SnoopDog]

4. But, but... Cliff is a lawyer.....!

[kcass1954]

8. And the lawyer who represents himself

has a fool for a client and an asshole for an attorney!

[SnoopDog]

11. Personally, I would trust myself than..

to rely on somebody else.

Especially in my own professional field...

[demodonkey]

5. Lawyers need OTHER LAWYERS to help defend these kinds of attacks.

The idea is that to go up against these charges they will need legal specialists, research, strategy, etc.

The upside of it is that if it goes to the Ohio Supremes it will be a GOLDEN opportunity for the whole issue to come out, especially if our side gets its ducks in a row and plans it right (hence the need for a big legal team!)

Please believe me, the need is real.

[SnoopDog]

7. Link, please, for the lawsuit against these folks....

[Mistwell]

12. Not a lawsuit

It's the same suit...it's just a motion for sanctions I believe.

It's incredibly difficult to get sanctions against someone for filing a case. The odds are way with these guys...

[SnoopDog]

13. I'm not a lawyer - but until a lawsuit is filed

there is nothing to worry about....


When a lawsuit is actually filed - then you should post the post...

It would be a disgrace to solicit funds maliciously.

[Mistwell]

19. Ahem...read again

As I understand it, it's NOT A LAWSUIT ITSELF, but SANCTIONS ON THE EXISTING PREVIOUSLY FILED SUIT.

It is a motion for sanctions against the attorneys who filed the case. It will never be it's own case, as the docket number stays with the underlying case that sanctions are being sought for.

I was just saying that I think the odds are overwhelmingly against the motion. Those kind of motions are sought all the time, and shot down by the judge about 90% of the time.

[Yellow Horse]

14. Additional Links -- note Conyers' Letter among others

AP Article:
http://www.nbc4i.com/politics/4107410/detail.html

Free Press Article:
http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1102

Letter From Conyers to Ohio Attorney General regarding this action:
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/ohagsanctionltr12005.pdf

This is NOT "nothing to worry about".

It is a very real motion in the Moss v. Bush lawsuit brought in Ohio Supreme Court (case no. 04-2088). It is also a blatant attempt to silence and supress anybody who dares to mount a challenge for free and fair elections in the future. The Ohio Supreme Count is almost entirely Republican and these people need defense -- by OTHER attorneys, not themselves.

And nobody is "soliciting funds maliciously". GEESH. These people are in this mess because they tried to save our butts, or at least save our Democracy's butt.

[SnoopDog]

16. My friend... I have donated ...for real causes

$700 dollars in the last 6 months to Democracy.

I am simply concerned that I do not see an actual docket # in the Ohio Court system.

If you will, please, show me where they are sued and for the 'damage' amount - I will then be the next one to contribute....


I am ... A self proclaimed patriot and real American for democracy...

[Yellow Horse]

18. The motion calls for SANCTIONS against them, NOT a new lawsuit.

The case is Moss v. Bush, Ohio Supreme Court case no. 04-2088

The filings were made in that case, the past week, in the Ohio Supreme Court by Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro, on behalf of Kenneth Blackwell.

Please feel free to look it up yourself.

I think that Representative John Conyers' letter says a lot. Mr. Conyers certainly has enough on his plate right now that he would not be sending letters in defense on non-existing issues.

As for "damages" being sought, again this is not a lawsuit against these people, it is a call for SANCTIONS.

I'm not an attorney, but it is my understanding that these people could lose their license to practice law, or be subjected to high fines, or face other penalties if the sanctions are enforced against them.

[SnoopDog]

20. Please show where the sanctions have been filed.....

[Mistwell]

22. Oh for christ sake!

They are not facing a loss of their license. Judges do not do that...bar associations do.

The fine is likely not at all high. In fact, I would expect it to be something like a $1000, even if it is granted (which itself is very unlikely).

Y'all need to calm down. Seriously, you are over-reacting. It's a simple motion for sanctions. It happens every day. It happens, eventually, to pretty much any attorney who litigates. It's almost always denied. In the rare case when it is granted, it's not a big deal generally beyond a sting to the ego.

Unless you know different, or Ohio law is different than most states...and if that is the case, please do tell us.

[Mistwell]

21. No, not really

It's just a motion for sanctions guys. It will likely last less than a half hour in court discussion. This is not an appellate case, they do not need more lawyers, they do not need extensive briefs or research or specialists or much in the way of strategy. This kind of stuff happens every day. One side moves for sanctions, the other side explains (usually verbally with maybe a short written opposition) why sanctions are not appropriate in this case, and the judge decides. 90% of the time the decision is to deny the motion, because it's not the kind of crap a judge ever wants to deal with, and there is no appeal from a denial of that kind of motion.

Now, if they manage to lose this motion, then yes, they will need some funds to help them out (which I would be happy to donate to). However, I think it is seriously premature to go around claiming they need to hire a staff to defend against a "charge" and research and strategize and hire specialists etc...

Really, I think y'all are crying that the sky is falling when it is not. Calm down. Let them just respond like they always do to a sanctions motion (which I am sure they have all handled a dozen times or more...it's just something that happens to a litigator), and let's see what happens.

[SnoopDog]

23. So, this call for donations is not at this time necessary?

nor warranted?

[Mistwell]

25. In my opinion

It is premature...

[Goldeneye]

6. Send it to Randi right away.

She'll talk about it on her show. Hasn't she had Arnebeck or any of these guys on? Regardless she'll be pissed and she'll talk about it.


On edit, this is proof positive that they cheated, and they plan to cheat again.

[Carolab]

10. How about Ed Schultz? And Malloy?

They can talk about it too.

P.S. I donated.

[Mister Ed]

9. Done. Kick.

[KaliTracy]

15. It's true - Petro has asked for sanctions and Conyers has Called him on it

Still looking for link to actual filling....

Article in Free Press:
"Ohio's GOP Attorney General launches revenge attack on Election Protection legal team
by Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman
January 19, 2005

COLUMBUS -- In a stunning legal attack, Ohio's Republican Attorney General has moved for sanctions against the four attorneys who sued George W. Bush et. al. in an attempt to investigate the Buckeye State's bitterly contested November 2 election.

Robert Fitrakis, Susan Truitt, Cliff Arnebeck and Peter Peckarsky were named by Attorney General James Petro in a filing with the Ohio Supreme Court. Petro charges the November Moss v Bush and Moss v. Moyer filings by the Election Protection legal team were "frivolous." Petro is demanding court sanctions and fines.

"Instead of evidence, contesters offered only theory, conjecture, hypothesis and invective," the Attorney General's January 18th memo about the suit said. "A contest proceeding is not a toy for idle hands. It is not to be used to make a political point, or to be used as a discovery tool, or be used to inconvenience or harass public officials, or to be used as a publicity gimmick."

But Cliff Arnebeck says it has been Petro and Ohio's partisan Republican Secretary of State, J. Kenneth Blackwell, who have stonewalled the election challenge legal proceedings. Both have refused to submit any evidence to the court to refute the allegations in the election challenge case - claiming George W. Bush did not win a majority in Ohio - and Petro's office has also refused to allow any Ohio public election official to be deposed. "

More: http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1102

************

Letter from Conyers:

-- to which Conyers responded quite quickly

"I write to express my concern regarding your recent request to sanction those attorneys who brought a legal challenge to last year's presidential election in Ohio. In particular, I am concerned that by seeking official censure and fines, you are engaged in a selective and partisan misuse of your legal authority. As eager as many disgruntled voters are to have a court of law finally assess the merits of the challenge actions, I have serious doubts about the validity of the sanctions case your office is pursuing. "

More:http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/ohagsanctionltr12005.pdf

[understandinglife]

17. Have forwarded to VelvetRevolution, BradBlog and JTM and...

...asked them to consider posting as to increase awareness of the issue and support.


Peace.



BE THE BUSH OPPOSITION;24/7

[Mistwell]

24. Clearing some myths up

I've read a lot of misconceptions in this thread, and I just wanted to take a stab at clearing some things up.

Now, while I am an attorney, I am not an attorney in Ohio, nor am I any longer a litigator.

That said...

A) This is not a lawsuit or a criminal action or an administrative bar action. It's a motion for sanctions based on the underlying suit that these four attorneys themselves filed. So please, stop asking to see a separate lawsuit...there is none, nor will there ever be. It's just a motion, and not it's own lawsuit.

B) This is NOT a major deal to resond to. You do not hire your own attorney to defend you in these kind of cases. You do not need a team to do a lot of research. You do not file a boatload of paperwork in response. This is a very standard motion, which pretty much every litigator faces in their career, usually several times. It happens all the time. It is almost always denied. It is almost always dealt with using oral arguments and usually a page or two written response, most of which is a form document that every litigator has in their files.

C) The attorneys are likely NOT facing a big penalty, even in the very unlikely event that this motion is granted.

My understanding is that they face sanctions under two Ohio Civil Practice rules:

1) "For a willful violation of this rule an attorney or pro se party, upon motion of a party or upon the court's own motion, may be subjected to appropriate action, including an award to the opposing party of expenses and reasonable attorney fees incurred in bringing any motion under this rule";

2) "If the Supreme Court, on motion or on its own initiative, determines that an appeal or other action is frivolous or is prosecuted for delay, harassment, or any other improper purpose, it may impose, on the person who signed the appeal or action, a represented party, or both, appropriate sanctions, including an award to the opposing party of reasonable expenses, reasonable attorney fees, costs or double costs, or any other sanction considered just."

Now, in my experience (which, again, is not in Ohio), you generally are facing a sanction for the attorney's fees of the other side for the entire case, along with sometimes a slap on the wrist sort of fine of like a $1000. I've never in my life heard of a sanction that was in the $100,000+ range like I keep hearing about in this thread. Usally, it's about a $1000 total.

You cannot lose your license to practice law from this kind of motion. You license is granted and controlled by the state bar administration, not by a judge.

4) You can view both motions here:

http://www.ag.state.oh.us/press_releases/2005/pr20050120.htm

I hope that helps clear some things up.

[SnoopDog]

26. Therefore, lets stop this thread and ...

get on with ethics, morals, standards, and DEMOCRACY....

[Mistwell]

29. No need to stop the thread

I'm not saying stop the thread. Hey, if people want to talk about this, more power to them. The sanctions motion is bogus, and people have a right to be upset that it was filed.

[emlev]

27. These folks have really stuck their necks out for the cause

and need our support!

[SnoopDog]

28. What kind of support are you talking about?

Show me the sanctions as per the Ohio Courts....

I fully support our democracy where it is warranted...

[demodonkey]

30. I'd like to clear a few things up too

The four people under this attack by the Ohio Attorney General have all been leaders in the fight to expose the problems with the 2004 election, and in the opinion of myself and many others, are worthy of support.

This issue is way more than your ordinary garden-variety attorney sanction action, because it is on a highly-charged case and it is going through the highly partisan Ohio Supreme Court via the highly partisan Petro and Blackwell. And I can assure you that if Blackwell is involved, the costs will be far more than just $1000 or a slap on the wrist. He is the one who managed to inflate the alleged Ohio Recount "costs" to $1.5 million and in most cases that so-called recount took less than half a day!

Also, as I said, if this issue gets to court via this motion, it may be a golden opportunity to get the 2004 election problems heard fully in court. To prove that the election fraud case was "frivolous", they are going to have to discuss it, which up to now the courts in Ohio have been very reluctant to do.

If somebody wants to donate, please donate. If somebody doesn't want to donate, please don't, and please move on. There are plenty of other posts and causes on DU to take up your time.