Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Plasticon: Fact or Fiction - Discuss it here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Captain James T. Kirk who wrote (133)	4/7/2006 9:48:13 PM
From: midway moron	Respond to of 191

You were a wolf in sheeps clothing from the get go on this one. You sure have some slithering associates, I'll bet your proud.

To: Captain James T. Kirk who wrote (133)	4/7/2006 9:51:04 PM
From: midway moron	Respond to of 191

Perhaps you could expound on your freinds activities here. UCSY wins sanctions against basher worm06... UCSY Announces Legal Update: In the Matter of UCSY & AirWater Corp vs. Villasenor, Court Awards Plaintiffs Sanctions, and Orders Defendant to Appear in Person to Answer Contempt Charges Thursday April 6, 1:00 am ET MIAMI BEACH, FL--(MARKET WIRE)--Apr 6, 2006 -- Universal Communication Systems, Inc. company chairman, Michael Zwebner, announced today that in ongoing court proceedings, in the Eleventh Judicial Circuit for Miami Dade County, the company has been awarded $14,480.00 in legal fees. This award was ordered by the court on April 5th, 2006, for sanctions against defendant Roberto G. Villasenor, who has been given 10 days in which to pay. In addition, on March 17th, 2006, the court entered the following order: "ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: Plaintiffs' Repeated Motion to Hold Defendant Villasenor in Contempt is GRANTED. This Court finds that defendant Villasenor has knowingly and intentionally violated this Court's Orders of January 9, 2006, November 4, 2005, September 27, 2005, July 6, 2005, and August 31, 2005 by failing to produce documents as ordered, failing to produce a privilege log as ordered and failing to provide the Court with documents for in camera inspection as ordered and by his numerous intentional acts to avoid having his deposition taken as ordered. This Court finds that plaintiffs have been prejudiced by the defendant Villasenor's violations of this Court's orders. As sanctions for Villasenor's repeated violations of this Court's orders, this Court awards plaintiffs their reasonable attorney's fees and costs in an amount to be determined by this Court. Furthermore, defendant Roberto Villasenor is hereby ordered to appear in person for the taking of his Deposition on April 17, 2006 at 9 a.m. at the offices of plaintiff's counsel, 2999 NE 191 St. Suite 704, Miami, Florida. Defendant Roberto Villasenor is also ordered to appear before this Court in person on April 18th, 2006 at 9 a.m. to show cause why additional contempt sanctions should not be imposed. Defendant Roberto Villasenor is ordered to produce copies of all of the requested documents within 10 days, all objections having now been waived. DONE AND SO ORDERED" The company will continue to take all appropriate action, including legal actions, against all persons who publish false and misleading information about the company and its workers or who intentionally and knowingly attempt to manipulate the stock price of the company or who, through their conduct, cause interference and commercial damage to the company sprink

To: Captain James T. Kirk who wrote (133)	4/7/2006 9:53:50 PM
From: midway moron	Respond to of 191

You know, you and your freinds are such experts on law maybe you can share some expertise on this one? CONTEMPT OF COURT - Any willful disobedience to, or disregard of, a court order or any misconduct in the presence of a court; action that interferes with a judge's ability to administer justice or that insults the dignity of the court; punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. There are both civil and criminal contempts; the distinction is often unclear. Contempt Of Court -- Civil Or Criminal A judge who feels someone is improperly challenging or ignoring the court's authority has the power to declare the defiant person (called the contemnor) in contempt of court. There are two types of contempt - criminal and civil. Criminal contempt occurs when the contemnor actually interferes with the ability of the court to function properly - for example, by yelling at the judge. This is also called direct contempt because it occurs directly in front of the judge. A criminal contemnor may be fined, jailed or both as punishment for his act. Civil contempt occurs when the contemnor willfully disobeys a court order. This is also called indirect contempt because it occurs outside the judge's immediate realm and evidence must be presented to the judge to prove the contempt. A civil contemnor, too, may be fined, jailed or both. The fine or jailing is meant to coerce the contemnor into obeying the court, not to punish him, and the contemnor will be released from jail just as soon as he complies with the court order. In family law, civil contempt is one way a court enforces alimony, child support, custody and visitation orders which have been violated. However, many courts have realized that, at least regarding various procedural matters such as appointment of counsel, the distinction between civil and criminal contempt is often blurred and uncertain. A Willful Disregard Or Disobedience Of A Public Authority. By the Constitution of the United States, each house of congress may determine the rules of its proceeding's, punish its members for disorderly behaviour and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member. The same provision is substantially contained in the constitutions of the several states. The power to make rules carries that of enforcing them, and to attach persons who violate them and punish them for contempts. This power of punishing for contempts is confined to punishment during the session of the legislature and cannot extend beyond it, and it seems this power cannot be exerted beyond imprisonment. Courts of justice have an inherent power to punish all persons for contempt of their rules and orders, for disobedience of their process, and for disturbing them in their proceedings. In some states, as in Pennsylvania, the power to punish for contempts is restricted to offences committed by the officers of the court, or in its presence, or in disobedience of its mandates, orders, or rules; but no one is guilty of a contempt for any publication made or act done out of court which is not in violation of such lawful rules or orders, or disobedience of its process. Similar provisions, limiting the power of the courts of the United States to punish for contempts, are incorporated in 28 U.S.C. When a person is in prison for a contempt, it has been decided in New York that he cannot be discharged by another judge when brought before him on a habeas corpus; and it belongs exclusively to the court offended to judge of contempts and what amounts to them; and no other court or judge can, or ought to undertake in a collateral way, to question or review an adjudication of a contempt made by another competent jurisdiction. sprink

To: Captain James T. Kirk who wrote (133)	4/7/2006 9:54:55 PM
From: midway moron	Respond to of 191

This is of course my opinion, but I do wonder if JT's lawyer has already phoned the courier to pick up a special delivery for some other cyber stalkers! Best Wishes, sprink

To: Captain James T. Kirk who wrote (133)	4/7/2006 9:55:59 PM
From: midway moron	Respond to of 191

The authorities will probably have to issue a warrant for his arrest, the man does not have the gonadss to face the music on his own, like a man. For as much dirt these bashers have thrown on Turek for his legal troubles, they sit silent about their criminal worm. This is just the beginning, more of his followers are being investigated as we speak. Instead of wasting all their time on these boards trying to take down Turek and PLNI, they should be scouring the yellow pages for a good lawyer or buying their one way airline tickets to South America. Best Wishes, sprink

To: Captain James T. Kirk who wrote (133)	4/7/2006 9:58:01 PM
From: midway moron	Respond to of 191

Hey Capt. The bashing criminals have lost their grip on PLNI, they are scoping out their next poor victim or leaving the country. Best Wishes, sprink