Kwestion for Arnii Krooborg.

[George M. Middius]

Arnii, Scott tells us he has the return receipt from the registered
letter he sent you. He implied you received the letter on Monday. So
now you've been named as a defendant in his lawsuit in California.
Unfortunately for you, your master plan to mind-control the judge into
tossing the suit because of your well-known moral superiority seems to
have failed. Was that the "trap" you set for Scott, or is the "trap"
still to come? In the absence of any action by you before the trial
date arrives, you will lose the judgment by default. So I'd like to
speculate that losing by default *is* the "trap" you set for him.
Somehow, in some way none of us can know, losing a civil damages
lawsuit will be a victory for you. Perhaps it's the excuse you've been
waiting for to shoot your so-called family, and then yourself, and
plunge into what you hope is martyrdom. Or maybe you'll be able to
declare bankruptcy to escape a bunch of other debts. Or, if you've
already transferred to the title to your house and car to "Kroobitch,
Mrs.", maybe you think you can just laugh when the collection suit is
filed in Goose Pointe.

Care to enlighten us? ;-)

[The Devil]

On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 18:29:17 -0400, George M. Middius
> wrote:

>Arnii, Scott tells us he has the return receipt from the registered
>letter he sent you. He implied you received the letter on Monday. So
>now you've been named as a defendant in his lawsuit in California.
>Unfortunately for you, your master plan to mind-control the judge into
>tossing the suit because of your well-known moral superiority seems to
>have failed. Was that the "trap" you set for Scott, or is the "trap"
>still to come? In the absence of any action by you before the trial
>date arrives, you will lose the judgment by default. So I'd like to
>speculate that losing by default *is* the "trap" you set for him.
>Somehow, in some way none of us can know, losing a civil damages
>lawsuit will be a victory for you. Perhaps it's the excuse you've been
>waiting for to shoot your so-called family, and then yourself, and
>plunge into what you hope is martyrdom. Or maybe you'll be able to
>declare bankruptcy to escape a bunch of other debts. Or, if you've
>already transferred to the title to your house and car to "Kroobitch,
>Mrs.", maybe you think you can just laugh when the collection suit is
>filed in Goose Pointe.
>
>Care to enlighten us? ;-)

ROTFL

Aw, boy.

--
td

[Robert Morein]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
>
> Arnii, Scott tells us he has the return receipt from the registered
> letter he sent you. He implied you received the letter on Monday. So
> now you've been named as a defendant in his lawsuit in California.
> Unfortunately for you, your master plan to mind-control the judge into
> tossing the suit because of your well-known moral superiority seems to
> have failed. Was that the "trap" you set for Scott, or is the "trap"
> still to come? In the absence of any action by you before the trial
> date arrives, you will lose the judgment by default. So I'd like to
> speculate that losing by default *is* the "trap" you set for him.
> Somehow, in some way none of us can know, losing a civil damages
> lawsuit will be a victory for you. Perhaps it's the excuse you've been
> waiting for to shoot your so-called family, and then yourself, and
> plunge into what you hope is martyrdom. Or maybe you'll be able to
> declare bankruptcy to escape a bunch of other debts. Or, if you've
> already transferred to the title to your house and car to "Kroobitch,
> Mrs.", maybe you think you can just laugh when the collection suit is
> filed in Goose Pointe.
>
> Care to enlighten us? ;-)
>
First class mail is not adequate legal notice for a law suit.
Arni has to be served by a process server.

[S888Wheel]

>
>First class mail is not adequate legal notice for a law suit.
>Arni has to be served by a process server.
>

Robert, I understand that you are a very inteligent person, however you are
clearly not up on your California Civil Procedure Codes.

[George M. Middius]

S888Wheel said:

> >First class mail is not adequate legal notice for a law suit.
> >Arni has to be served by a process server.

> Robert, I understand that you are a very inteligent person, however you are
> clearly not up on your California Civil Procedure Codes.

Did Krooger sign for the letter, or did the receipt come back marked
"Refused"?

[S888Wheel]

>
>Did Krooger sign for the letter, or did the receipt come back marked
>"Refused"?

Niether. I simply used the delivery confirmation service. I have a certificate
of proof of delivery and a copy of the exact details of delievery via the
internet. The clerk has already accepted and filed my proof of summons. It's a
done deal regardless of anyone's opinion on the matter. Arny has until the 15th
of November to answer the complaint. It has to be submitted in the proper legal
format to be accepted by the clerk. If Arny fails to submit a properly
formatted answer by the 15th I will file for a default judgement against him
and we will go from there. If Arny hires a lawyer in L.A. to answer the
complaint we will go forward with the lawsuit.

[Arny Krueger]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message

> S888Wheel said:

>>> First class mail is not adequate legal notice for a law suit.
>>> Arni has to be served by a process server.

>> Robert, I understand that you are a very inteligent (sic) person, however
>> you are clearly not up on your California Civil Procedure Codes.

> Did Krooger (sic) sign for the letter, or did the receipt come back marked
> "Refused"?

Yet another ignorant comment from the Middiot. He's obviously not up on his
California Civil Procedure Codes even though it's been properly suggested
that they be read before commenting. The necessary information is easy
enough to find, but doing so is obviously beyond what the Middiot's pointed
little head can fathom.

[Robert Morein]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >Did Krooger sign for the letter, or did the receipt come back marked
> >"Refused"?
>
> Niether. I simply used the delivery confirmation service. I have a
certificate
> of proof of delivery and a copy of the exact details of delievery via the
> internet. The clerk has already accepted and filed my proof of summons.
It's a
> done deal regardless of anyone's opinion on the matter. Arny has until the
15th
> of November to answer the complaint. It has to be submitted in the proper
legal
> format to be accepted by the clerk. If Arny fails to submit a properly
> formatted answer by the 15th I will file for a default judgement against
him
> and we will go from there. If Arny hires a lawyer in L.A. to answer the
> complaint we will go forward with the lawsuit.

Haven't followed this.
What is this about? Typical child molestation accusation?

[Robert Morein]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
>
> > S888Wheel said:
>
> >>> First class mail is not adequate legal notice for a law suit.
> >>> Arni has to be served by a process server.
>
> >> Robert, I understand that you are a very inteligent (sic) person,
however
> >> you are clearly not up on your California Civil Procedure Codes.
>
> > Did Krooger (sic) sign for the letter, or did the receipt come back
marked
> > "Refused"?
>
> Yet another ignorant comment from the Middiot. He's obviously not up on
his
> California Civil Procedure Codes even though it's been properly suggested
> that they be read before commenting. The necessary information is easy
> enough to find, but doing so is obviously beyond what the Middiot's
pointed
> little head can fathom.
>
What is your understanding of the requirement for notice, or serving, for a
civil law suit?

[George M. Middius]

The Big **** bitched:

> > Did Krooger (sic)

How's that class in Basic Grammar and Typography coming, Turdy?

> > sign for the letter, or did the receipt come back marked "Refused"?

> Yet another ignorant comment from the Middiot[sic].

It was a question, not a "comment". Grammar much? ;-)

> He's obviously not up on his California Civil Procedure Codes

I don't have any such codes, you ninny.

> even though it's been properly suggested
> that they be read before commenting.

Oh dear, oh dear. Turdborg is steaming now!

Of course, I didn't "comment", but don't let that stop you from
ignoring the lawsuit.


> The necessary information is easy
> enough to find, but doing so is obviously beyond what the Middiot's[sic] pointed
> little head can fathom.

Is that going to be your defense in court, Arnii? That somebody on the
Internet didn't read the text of the law, so you're not responsible?

[Note absence of smarmy-winky icon]

God™ knows you've used similar excuses for your other filthy
behaviors. Somebody called you a pedophile, so you're entitled to call
Mister Wheeler one. Many people have called you a liar, so you're
entitled to call them one. Even in reverse: You've claimed this or
that person is ignorant or abusive of science, so that entitles to you
to be ignorant and abusive of it.

Also, it would be nice if you substantiated your accusation that by
reading the "California Civil Procedure Codes", I can learn whether
you signed for a specific registered letter. Not the same as learning
whether Mister Wheeler was required by law to send you one. TIA.

[Arny Krueger]

"Robert Morein" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
>>
>>> S888Wheel said:

>>>>> First class mail is not adequate legal notice for a law suit.
>>>>> Arni has to be served by a process server.

>>>> Robert, I understand that you are a very inteligent (sic) person,
>>>> however you are clearly not up on your California Civil Procedure
>>>> Codes.

>>> Did Krooger (sic) sign for the letter, or did the receipt come back
>>> marked "Refused"?

>> Yet another ignorant comment from the Middiot. He's obviously not up
>> on his California Civil Procedure Codes even though it's been
>> properly suggested that they be read before commenting. The
>> necessary information is easy enough to find, but doing so is
>> obviously beyond what the Middiot's pointed little head can fathom.

> What is your understanding of the requirement for notice, or serving,
> for a civil law suit?

Service rules vary with the court. They range from what you described to
rules that allow far more casual approaches.

As I mentioned, the rules for the court where sockpuppet Wheel filed are
online, but I don't have the link at hand. I easily got it from google.
There are actually several references, so searching google makes sense for
people who want to understand the issues.

If you want to know more about the actual filing, that is for sockpuppet
Wheel to reveal.

[Lionel]

George M. Middius wrote:
>
> S888Wheel said:
>
>
>>>First class mail is not adequate legal notice for a law suit.
>>>Arni has to be served by a process server.
>
>
>
>>Robert, I understand that you are a very inteligent person, however you are
>>clearly not up on your California Civil Procedure Codes.
>
>
> Did Krooger sign for the letter, or did the receipt come back marked
> "Refused"?
>
>
>
Fouille merde !

[Joe Duffy]

In article >,
S888Wheel > wrote:
>>
>>First class mail is not adequate legal notice for a law suit.
>>Arni has to be served by a process server.
>>
>
>Robert, I understand that you are a very inteligent person, however you are


LOL!

[Joe Duffy]

In article >,
S888Wheel > wrote:
>>
>>Did Krooger sign for the letter, or did the receipt come back marked
>>"Refused"?
>
>Niether. I simply used the delivery confirmation service. I have a certificate

LOL! Funny how the grammar policing midjet
ignores the utter morons who support his small
agenda.


Joe

[Arny Krueger]

"Joe Duffy" > wrote in message


> In article >,
> S888Wheel > wrote:

>>> Did Krooger sign for the letter, or did the receipt come back marked
>>> "Refused"?

>> Neither. I simply used the delivery confirmation service. I have a
>> certificate

> LOL! Funny how the grammar policing midjet
> ignores the utter morons who support his small
> agenda.

I've been pointing this out here for years. Change "Middius" to "Weil" or
"Singh" and repeat. Their underlying motivation is to be dominant, no
matter how ignorant and self-contradictory they are. A clash of these titans
of idiocy seemed to be inevitable. I've always been surprised it has taken
them so long to unravel.

[dave weil]

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:29:28 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"Joe Duffy" > wrote in message

>
>> In article >,
>> S888Wheel > wrote:
>
>>>> Did Krooger sign for the letter, or did the receipt come back marked
>>>> "Refused"?
>
>>> Neither. I simply used the delivery confirmation service. I have a
>>> certificate
>
>> LOL! Funny how the grammar policing midjet
>> ignores the utter morons who support his small
>> agenda.
>
>I've been pointing this out here for years. Change "Middius" to "Weil" or
>"Singh" and repeat. Their underlying motivation is to be dominant, no
>matter how ignorant and self-contradictory they are. A clash of these titans
>of idiocy seemed to be inevitable. I've always been surprised it has taken
>them so long to unravel.

I like this new "dominance" loop that you have adopted. Perhaps it's
showing a little glimmer of self-awareness peeking through.

[Arny Krueger]

"dave weil" > wrote in message

> On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:29:28 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Joe Duffy" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> S888Wheel > wrote:
>>
>>>>> Did Krooger sign for the letter, or did the receipt come back
>>>>> marked "Refused"?
>>
>>>> Neither. I simply used the delivery confirmation service. I have a
>>>> certificate
>>
>>> LOL! Funny how the grammar policing midjet
>>> ignores the utter morons who support his small
>>> agenda.
>>
>> I've been pointing this out here for years. Change "Middius" to
>> "Weil" or "Singh" and repeat. Their underlying motivation is to be
>> dominant, no matter how ignorant and self-contradictory they are. A
>> clash of these titans of idiocy seemed to be inevitable. I've always
>> been surprised it has taken them so long to unravel.
>
> I like this new "dominance" loop that you have adopted. Perhaps it's
> showing a little glimmer of self-awareness peeking through.

It's like you to avoid self-awareness and try to blame someone else for your
situation, Weil. Check the other audio newsgroups where I post. I'm not
dominant, I don't try to be dominant, and I'm happy to be one of many. I'm
very much a team player. Of course there needs to be a group of people who
are competent enough to form a team for me to join. Given the fairly
successful organized effort to chase competent people away from RAO, it's
not likely to happen here in the short term.

[dave weil]

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 10:12:09 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"dave weil" > wrote in message

>> On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:29:28 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Joe Duffy" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>> In article >,
>>>> S888Wheel > wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Did Krooger sign for the letter, or did the receipt come back
>>>>>> marked "Refused"?
>>>
>>>>> Neither. I simply used the delivery confirmation service. I have a
>>>>> certificate
>>>
>>>> LOL! Funny how the grammar policing midjet
>>>> ignores the utter morons who support his small
>>>> agenda.
>>>
>>> I've been pointing this out here for years. Change "Middius" to
>>> "Weil" or "Singh" and repeat. Their underlying motivation is to be
>>> dominant, no matter how ignorant and self-contradictory they are. A
>>> clash of these titans of idiocy seemed to be inevitable. I've always
>>> been surprised it has taken them so long to unravel.
>>
>> I like this new "dominance" loop that you have adopted. Perhaps it's
>> showing a little glimmer of self-awareness peeking through.
>
>It's like you to avoid self-awareness and try to blame someone else for your
>situation, Weil. Check the other audio newsgroups where I post. I'm not
>dominant, I don't try to be dominant, and I'm happy to be one of many. I'm
>very much a team player. Of course there needs to be a group of people who
>are competent enough to form a team for me to join. Given the fairly
>successful organized effort to chase competent people away from RAO, it's
>not likely to happen here in the short term.

Thank you for admitting that you try to dominate this newsgroup.