Sunday, April 6, 2014

Crystal Cox Case, Obsidian Finance Group v. Blogger Crystal Cox. It is NOT ok, NOT Ethical, NOT Legal and certainly NOT constitutional for Judges to take pot shots at litigants and place unrelated criminal allegations made by a New York Times reporter, into YOUR Ninth Circuit Civil Court Appeal.

Folks, this Sentence in a NINTH Circuit, 3 Panel Judge Ruling
affects the Public at large in a MAJOR way.

"“Cox apparently has a history of making similar allegations and seeking payoffs in exchange for retraction"

Regardless of your "Opinion" of Crystal Cox BEING an Extortionist or not. This precedence is dangerous to all, and essentially will chill the speech of anti-corruption bloggers as they can be discredited and painted out to be criminals, as a "pot shot" in a Ninth Circuit ruling of a civil case brought against them for defamation and to essentially "shut them up".

It really is NOT ok for Judges to throw in "other" allegations, in a ruling. Allegations that were NOT a material factor, NOT of "the record" in the lower court case in which they are ruling on.

These criminal extortion Allegations, slipped into a ninth circuit civil case appeal, is not based in law, rights of due process, or constitutional rights. 

These Allegations, the Judges knowingly and noted, with credit, as coming from a New York Times journalist, of which their ruling had just gave that blogger and essentially all bloggers and citizens journalists equal rights to that New York Times journalist, as well as other institutional press journalists.

Ninth Circuit Judges; Judge Arthur L. Alarcón, Judge Milan D. Smith, Jr.,and Judge Andrew D. Hurwitz, took the opinion, rant and ramblings of New York Times Reporter as Factual Evidence and issued a ruling stating that Cox has a history of posting allegations and seeking a pay off for extraction, which is the felony crime of extortion and of which is NOT based in fact, not based in adjudication for the crime of extortion, not based in evidence or sworn testimony regarding the crime of extortion and having given Blogger Crystal Cox no due process or constitutional rights in the matter what so ever.

Regardless of your opinion of me, Crystal Cox, wouldn't you have to agree that these Judges should not have this right? Would you want this to happen to you? Would you want due process and for judges such as Ninth Circuit Judges; Judge Arthur L. Alarcón, Judge Milan D. Smith, Jr.,and Judge Andrew D. Hurwitz to OBEY the law and NOT violate your constitutional rights?

It is not about removing allegations of extortion, regarding me, Crystal Cox. I could care less, as I know the Truth about that, and it would be IMPOSSIBLE to remove this defamatory lie from the Internet, thanks to Attorneys David Aman and Marc Randazza and Judge Marco Hernandez, as well
as the 3 panel Ninth Circuit judges who threw in their two cents on the matter.

The ISSUE is about the FACT, that it is NOT Ok, not Ethical, not Legal and certainly not constitutional for Judges to do this to anti-corruption bloggers essential to instill fear in them and chill their speech, disguised as a ruling in favor of Free Speech and equal rights for those same bloggers.

That one sentence now means that any of you out there exposing corruption that the New York Times or other institutional press does not approve of, or say they are paid by the "bad guys" aKa the judges, politicians, and corporations you may be exposing

 a Bit on Crystal Cox's Motion to Rehear and Redact ~ Playlist of 2 (audio only)
Crystal Cox talks about her Motion to Rehear and a bit about her Case and the attorneys involved.

  ,

Links to Research the Motion to Rehear

Crystal Cox Ninth Circuit Petition for Rehearing filed by Eugene Volokh on January 31st, 2014.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/204438383/Eugene-Volokh-Motion-to-Rehear-Obsidian-v-Cox

Crystal Cox Wins First Amendment Court Victory for all Bloggers, Whistleblower and Citizen Journalists, then files a Motion to Rehear requesting a Redaction of Extortion allegations.
http://crystalcoxmedia.blogspot.com/2014/02/crystal-cox-wins-first-amendment-court.html


Auction of Appeal Rights?

Case Dockets, where the Plaintiff, Kevin Padrick and Obsidian Finance Group via their Attorney David Aman of Tonkon Torp Law Firm attempted to SEIZE Cox's right to appeal. Cox alleges that David Aman was given legal advice on this matter by Cox's former attorney Marc Randazza of Randazza Legal Group.

http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/11/may-plaintiff-cut-off-a-poor-defendants-appeal-by-having-the-sheriff-sell-off-defendants-right-to-appeal/

http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/15/judge-blocks-plaintiffs-attempt-to-sell-indigent-defendants-appeal-rights/

Hearing Transcript Day Before Obsidian v. Cox Trial
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/117804185/Obsidian-Finance-Group-Vs-Crystal-Cox-Hearing-Day-Before-Trial (Page 16 shows Crystal Cox asking Judge Hernanez about Extortion allegations)

More on the Crystal Cox Case, Summit Bankruptcy, Extortion and More
http://www.crystalcoxcase.com/2014/03/crystal-cox-extortion-when-did-and-how.html

Monday, March 3, 2014

Randazza Legal Group, Marc Randazza; "Is Marc Randazza, Randazza Legal Group shaking down Porn Producers?"

""An Anti-Islamic movie is being used to lead the pornographic industry’s sheep to the slaughter



If you are a pornographic industry professional (namely a producer, studio owner or distributor), it’s imperative that you understand the following information… in fact your livelihood depends on it.
Four days ago on February 26, 2014 Eugene Volokh wrote an article for The Washington Post entitled“Copyright meets “Innocence of Muslims”: Ninth Circuit orders removal of movie from YouTube, on copyright grounds”. In summary, the article outlined the result of the Garcia v. Google inc. case of which the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that actors and actresses have copyright rights in their performances when they act in a video.
As of today,  Marc Randazza (a pornographic industry & copyright attorney) essentially repackaged Eugene Volokh’s article for Xbiz in what appears to be nothing more than an advertisement for the legal services of Randazza Legal Group, Marc’s own law firm.
Eugene Volokh has since posted another article on the Washington Post as of today in regards to the situation which outlines the 9th circuit court’s corrected/clarfied injuction (which can be read by clicking here).
click to enlarge – Marc Randazza of Las Vegas, Nevada encouraging porn professionals to leave Los Angeles.
click to enlarge – Marc Randazza of Las Vegas, Nevada encouraging porn professionals to leave Los Angeles.
What’s interesting about Marc Randazza’s article and advertisement for his law firm, is that it’s glaringly clear that whether pornographers utilize Randazza Legal Group or not (especially those who may have takenMarc Randazza’s own advice to willfully violate that law and produce their content in Las Vegas), he’s in the perfect position to make money off of porn producers, studio owner and distributors via what I can only define as a “legal extortion” scheme.
Isn’t it interesting how Marc Randazza (along with Diane Duke of the Free Speech Coalition of course), the very person who presented Las Vegas as being a virtual bastion of freedom for pornographers, is now stating well after many porn studios have been shooting in Las Vegas for a while, that the content they’ve produced in Las Vegas not only may cost them additional legal fees, but could essentially put them out of business? That is, of course, unless they utilize the legal services of firms such as Randazza Legal Group…
I have to wonder as to whether or not Marc Randazza somehow had advance or insider information as to what the outcome of the Garcia v. Google inc. case would be – especially considering that both Eugene Volokh and Marc Randazza are on the FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) Honorary Host Committee.  Furthermore, Eugene Volokh has been involved in the highly publicized legal situation ofindependent investigative blogger Crystal L. Cox – a woman who Marc Randazza has had issue with for quite some time now.
Keep in mind, regardless of what Marc Randazza and the Free Speech Coalition has told pornographers (and the mainstream media)all along it has NOT been legal to produce pornography outside of California or New Hampshire.  Prostitution is not even a legal industry in the city of Las Vegas, Nevada itself.
michael fattorosi aka pornlaw on twitter
Adult industry attorney Michael Fattorosi aka @PornLaw on twitter
To clarify in even more detail, I will quote a few things I spotted well known pornographic industry attorney Michael Fattorosi (@PornLaw)stating to his twitter followers as of February 27, 2014:
“New copyright decision could have an impact on porn produced in California… Gives performers more say in how their performances are used. It now turns a performer’s acting into something protected by copyright – if – there’s no signed model release.”
“Producers have to now be careful how they use [and] title their movies and how scenes are used for comps.”
“I think it’s a rare situation but this can limit a producers rights”
“…not all model releases are valid. A model release can be invalidated. What if you are producing outside of Cali ?”
“In some ways this case makes it a very difficult situation for producers that are shooting in Las Vegas – for example.”
“Producers everywhere should have their model releases re-written to take into account the holding in this case.”
“If you shoot in a state where porn is not legally protected as in Cali or NH this decision could have a major impact on your productions.”
diane duke marc randazza sociopathic power hungry foolsTo reiterate, it seems what Marc Randazza alluded to in his Xbiz article / advertisement, is that if pornography professionals utilize a “Free Speech” & “Copyright” specialty law firm such as Randazza Legal Group to re-write their model releases they’ll be fairly “safe” – otherwise they may be a TARGET of Randazza Legal Group (on behalf of pornstars who may become their client).
Again, is it just me or does this seem like a form of “legal extortion”? Or to be more blunt…a legal “shake down” scam?
Randazza’s article, from my perspective, states that pornographic studio owners such as the young Mike Kulich of Monarchy Distribution (who’s known for creating compilation DVDs) and veteran pornographers such as Rob Black of Extreme Associates (who has an extensive catalog which he still earns money off of via online distribution) alike may be at high risk due to something called “Actors Remorse”.
Nina Devon as Rudy (left) in Not The Cosbys XXX 2 - Does this character look like an 18 year old to you?
Nina Devon as Rudy (left) in Not The Cosbys XXX 2 – Does this character look like an 18 year old to you?
To further explain, Marc Randazza’s article reminded me of how I feel about my appearance as a lead character in Not The Cosbys XXX 2, which was distributed by Hustler (Larry Flynts company).  I was not aware when I signed on to do the project that the character of Rudy (the youngest daughter in the “Cosby” family, who was styled to look like a child no older than the age of 10) would have a sex scene.
That particular scene, was a scene of which I feel depicted an instance of child porn / pedophilia.  To this day, I am bothered that I was featured in a movie along side something that may remind the public of child pornography…something pedophiles might enjoy, which is  something Marc Randazza may know a lot about considering his essay defending the horrific book – The Pedophile’s Guide and his affiliation with internationally known convicted pedophile August Kurt Brackob aka Kurt Treptow.
I can only speculate as to whether or not Marc Randazza would be willing to represent me in an “Actor’s Remorse” case against Larry Flynt (a man of which Marc Randazza appears to greatly admire according to a recent job posting he wrote for his lawfirm).
To conclude, whether this situation is an effort to eliminate the competition for larger pornographic companies like Manwin, or is just a means for attorneys to make a substantial amount of money off the pornographic industry - it simply seems to me that Marc Randazza and the Free Speech Coalition are not only fleecing the pornographic industry’s sheep – they have led the sheep to the slaughter.
Marc Randazza, who stated to me via email that he has an “affection for the Jewish community” (and who I have since requested to cease communication with me though he has ignored my request not just once, but twice today) certainly appears to have managed to trap quite a few within the Jewish community (who are long time pornographic industry professionals) directly under his thumb – legally and financially at least."

Saturday, February 15, 2014

"Ari Bass aka Michael Whiteacre monitoring Monica Foster’s webcam for Marc Randazza?" Monica Foster, Investigative Blogger Reporting

"James Malcolm DeVoy of Randazza Legal Group assisting Ari Bass aka Michael Whiteacre in his stalking of anti porn activist Shelley Lubben
In 2011, it came to the attention of Alexandra Mayers aka Monica Foster that Randazza Legal Group employee James Malcolm DeVoy was working with and assisting Ari Bass aka Michael Whiteacre (of The Real Pornwikileaks) in his stalking of anti-porn activist Shelley Lubben.

As of today (February 15, 2014) Bass / Whiteacre has made it known publicly that he is monitoring and recording Alexandra Mayers on her live webcam (of which she performs solo independent live shows as Monica Foster).Bass / Whiteacre has an extensive history of stalking, harassing and threatening Alexandra Mayers and her family members along with various other camgirls, pornstars, ex pornstars and anti-porn activists.
Ari Bass aka Michael Whiteacre tweeting a screen shot from Alexandra Mayers aka Monica Foster's live webcam on Streamate 2/15/2014.  A recording of the show would reflect that Alexandra was sober at the time.
Ari Bass aka Michael Whiteacre tweeting a screen shot from Alexandra Mayers aka Monica Foster’s live webcam on Streamate 2/15/2014. A recording of the show would reflect that Alexandra was sober at the time.
This development is on the heels of Alexandra Mayers making it clear she will be taking legal action against Randazza Legal Group and the privately owned company GoDaddy.  
henderson ari bass michael whiteacre
As of current it appears that Ari Bass may be monitoring Alexandra Mayers aka Monica Foster’s live cam shows on behalf of Randazza Legal Group (Marc Randazza specifically). In addition Ari Bass has stated on his twitter he is relocating to the Las Vegas, NV area (fairly close to where Randazza Legal Group offices located).
It is advised that independent solo webcam performers use extreme caution if contacted by (and not work with) Bass / Whiteacre or anyone attached to Randazza Legal Group"
Source
http://www.randazzanews.com/?p=195"