Complaint Review: James Silverstien - Los California

Who would want any lawyer to respond in such an insane way to a report. I've acessed the records in this case and it is astounding how many omissions and lies Mr. Silverstein is willing to make against a former client.

The public records were easily accessed and they show that not only was the defendant found competent to stand trial but that she was acquitted of all the counts that Mr. Silverstein was hired for-- by a public defender. It also shows that he has all the facts of the case and even the dates all wrong. How embarrassing this will all be for him when his victims file suit for defamation. How dare he worry about his reputation after what he did to theseexcellent and innocentpeople.

Why is he trying to defame those he didn't even represent is another good questin. Too many questons if one sees the public records in case 8CA10541 and the accompanying files.

It almost appears that he is stupid, clueless, and self destructive and yet his obvious ommissions show that this is all done with intent and malice.

Mr. James Silverstein is a disgrace to the legal profession and he should have returned the stolen funds when he had a chance.

On these pages, James Silverstein and Peter Knecht admit that they acted throughout as adversaries and not advocates. Silverstein now alleges that he "zestfully" represents his clients. Well, any lawyer who doesn't know the difference between "zestfully" and "zealously" is trouble right there but as can be seen right here -- Silverstein and Knecht all along were not looking at any evidence or the many witnesses . Who the hell would want a lawyer who does no investigation or worse- won't even glance at the investigation already made avaliable?

They both were given the overwhelming evidence and witnesses that showed that Tig Notaro was a fraud and a phony and that she had given gifts and gigs to wannabe comedians in exchange for false testimony.The appeals decision was based on a fraud and that is long known. Either Silverstein is so obtuse that he just immediately believes everyone is guilty or he is lying in the ugliest way imaginable. I would say that Silverstein is not a bright man but he knows very well he is lying. As for Knecht, he wanted to sign a statement saying he was defrauded by Silvestein so his role gets more and more confusing.

The public defender would learn of the fraud of Notaro as she would contact the witnesseses and she would say of Silverstein, " He raped you. He never contacted the witnesses in all that time". This public defender was never threatened by anyone and such a stupid lie will be easily proven at trial. Mr. James Silverstein is now just creating lies becuase he knows how guilty he is and he knows that his all defense is just to throw that kitchen sink and to see what sticks. Disgusting.

Silverstein didn't even have to contact the witnesses. All he had to do was look once at what the investigator for the public defender already had done before he was retained. Instead, Silverstein took all that money and made a few phone calls and he thinks that was enough?

He could have returned the unearned fee but he was sure that with a public defender his innocent client would get convicted and he'd be off scot free. How disgusting can you get.

As for Knecht, he now says he was defrauded by James Silverstein, and so his strange new tack of defamation and a defense of the INDEFENSIBLE James E Silverstein is not a wise move on his behalf. He either was defrauded by Silverstein or supports Silverstein's patently false defense. It is counter intuitive to believe otherwise.

Now ,they both, rather than face the reality that they stole 10k from an old woman and lied and cheated to get it- they attack the victim some more. These are not lawyers anyone should want when faced with a malicious prosecution or a regular prosecution. These are mean and stupid Los Angeles Sheisters.

These men even passionately agreed that it was a malicious prosecution where "unprecedent tactics" were used. They both repeatedly told the defendant how she had to sue the bastards who were doing this and that is why she needed to pay a good lawyer first.

Now they are changing their tune striclty to cover their miserable asses. They knew and know that they screwed innocent and law abiding people.

James Silverstein even told them that he had the utmost respect for the defendant and her family via e-mail and now he suddenly sees her as a criminal who rightfully lost a fraudulent appeal while jailed( Because he was too incompetent or evil to try to get her out in time for the oral hearing and when any lawyer would of and could of)

It is believed that thier real defense is that they saw a defendant being persecuted and they knew that if they tried to help they would make some enemies. They bowed out when they learned that as they said, " They are really out to get you."

Fine. They are cowards. There are many lawyers in Los Angeles that are cowards.They had a right to bow out when they thought it would compromise their bottom lines but they had no right to not return the unearned funds or to abandon the case under false pretenses or to try to please the adversaries by lying to induce a plea bargain--so they could earn their money and not do the work.

This report was written to warn the innocent. It one person doesn't have to endure what was endured with Silverstein and Knecht than it was worth all the lies and defamation now instigated against the victim, Alisa Spitzberg, by these two money grubbing sociopaths.

James Silverstien is out of his mind. His response assumes knowledge of who wrote it which is not wise considering how that backfired in the case mentioned.

James Silverstien's defamatory and lie filled ramblings  allow federal action and the slam dunk cause of action of defamation.  James Silverstien of James Silverstien law  is a danger to the interest of any poor client and he is a danger to himself as he is very self destructive as sociopath tend to self destruct. 

 His victims simply wanted some funds back, at first, and now it will cost him everything.  What a fool.

James E Silverstien is a phony and a malicious liar.

 It is very scary that a buffoon like him is able to practice law at all.

James Silverstien is now going to be sued for defamation and he will be disbarred. He is a sick joke. Tomorrow, the documents will be posted that will show what a disgusting and depraved liar he is. He is not only a depraved and pathetic man but he is as stupid it as it gets. He is a sociopath and one wonders if he simply can't understand the difference between wrong and right and one should simply pity him . Absolutely every word he says is a defamation and an obvious and easily proven  lie.

Not only is everything he says a lie but it is, in fact, irrelevant to his representation either way.

Nevertheless, every  word that James Silverstien says is an ugly and shameful lie, and he actually knows it . James E. Silverstien  is lying with malice and evil intent and that is abundantly clear to anyone knowing his victims and the facts of the case discussed.

 But, thank you thank you Rip off report for allowing him to defame his victims in print and allow such conclusive evidence to be presented to those who will punish him accordingly.  Watching James Silverstien get publicly  exposed as the sad and stupid phony he is will be long overdue and good for society as a whole. I guarantee any reader that Silverstien's insane rebuttal will have to be removed because he breached the terms of servicce.

. Bad Karma has caught up with this perverted and concienseless buffoon. I would bet that so many were screwed by him and felt they had no recourse. But, then he only passed the bar in 2006 and charges 500 dollars an hour so he must be smarter than he looks or acts.

He is as delusional and rotten as it gets and the world will  want to spit in his hideous face when they see his abuse and abandonment in case 8CA10541. .

James Silverstien is  a perverted con man and the worlds most absurd attorney. He stole 10k dollars and greedily won't return it. So, now he resorts to obvious and proven lies. The co-counsel in this case and  many others will testify to his unfathomable actions in this case.

 The PD who took it to trial said that Mr. Silverstein   "raped you." by stealing the money and doing nothing to get his client out or even interview the many witnesses . Witnesses such as  Markman and Dupee will decimate the credibility of James Silverstien who never  even looked at the damned file.

James Silverstien is very sick and very stupid "man," and that is proven in five minutes and he knows that. What he did here, rather than fess up and beg for forgiveness, is something exceptionally self destructive on his part. Truth is powerful stuff and he has none of it on his side. I've spoken to quite a few lawyers since and all agreed that James Silverstien and his cohort are  a disgrace to the profession.

 James Silevertien is a shameless and corrupt theif who wanted to make nice with the city attorney and judges at the expense of an innocent and very sane client\

My name is James Silverstein. This malicious, false report, as well as several others posted over the past several days, has been generated by a very disturbed individual, Alisa Spitzberg. Ms. Alisa Spitzberg may also have been aided by her sister, Lauren Spitzberg and/or their mother, Henya Spitzberg.

I am an attorney who was retained by Ms. Spitzberg in late 2009 to defend her against ongoing misdemeanor criminal charges which were brought by the Los Angeles City Attorney's Office. The following information is based upon public records generated in that case.

Ms. Spitzberg was arrested in or about 2008 for violating a valid restraining order entered against her by Judge Gerald Rosenberg in the Santa Monica Court. Ms. Spitzberg appealed that order, but it was upheld by the Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division 1. The Court of Appeals written decision recites in detail the awful, disturbing behavior exhibited by Ms. Spitzberg. See  http://ca.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.%5CCA%5C2009%5C20091119_0009756.CA.htm/qx

This restraining order was granted because the protected party and victim, Mathilde "Tig" Notaro, proved allegations that Ms. Alisa Spitzberg stalked and assaulted her by way of multiple witness testimony.  The evidence adduced in that hearing suggested that Ms. Spitzberg was displeased that Ms. notaro was apparently dating Ms. Spitzberg's ex-girlfriend, Stephanie Willen. Ms. Spitzberg stalked the victim, impeded her ability to work, made criminal threats against her, and ultimately assaulted her. The following excerpt is taken directly from the Court of Appeal written decision:

"The testimony of Notaro and others shows that Notaro was not only physically assaulted by Spitzberg on one occasion in August 2007, but that Notaro received at least two credible threats of violence from Spitzberg in April 2008. Spitzberg said to Seccia that she was "`going to get'" Notaro and that any time Notaro left her home or performed, Spitzberg was "`going to be on her.'" On April 29, 2008, Spitzberg told Whitaker that she knew the license plate number, make, and color of Notaro's car, and where Notaro lived. From this evidence, the trial court reasonably could have inferred that Spitzberg was following Notaro in order to harass and intimidate her and that such conduct constituted stalking. Spitzberg also engaged in a series of acts of harassment by making personal attacks, insults, and threats by way of e-mail.

On April 12, 2008, Seccia observed Notaro to be upset, nervous, and "freaked out" because of Spitzberg's conduct. On April 29, 2008, Notaro was afraid to leave the comedy club because Spitzberg was outside the door. The trial court reasonably could have inferred that Spitzberg's conduct was willful and malicious, seriously alarmed and annoyed Notaro, caused Notaro substantial emotional distress, served no legitimate purpose, and was not constitutionally protected."

In or about 2008, the Los Angeles City Attorney's Office filed a 273.6 charge against Ms. Spitzberg for violating that restraining order. Additional charges were later added by amendment, including making annoying and harrasing phone call or communications, stalking, and making criminal threats.  Ms. Spitzberg fired several attorneys she had prior to me because, regrettably, she is a paranoid, bi-polar, delusional psychopath, and in that state concluded irrationally that each attorney was not protecting her interests, and moreover, were in on some kind of "grand conspiracy" with Superior Court Judges, the Los Angeles Police Department and the City Attorney's Office to destroy her.

In or about October 2009, I was retained by Ms. Spitzberg to represent her following two free, prolonged consultations. The very next morning, I received a frantic phone call from her mother stating that the LAPD served an arrest warrant at their residence and took Ms. Spitzberg into custody. This is the beginning of the nightmare for me.

It turned out that prior to hiring me, the master arraignment court judge in the Clara Foltz Central Justice Center declared a doubt as to Ms. Spitzberg's mental competency to stand trial pursuant to Penal Code Section 1368. Ms. Spitzberg was ordered to report to Department 95 - the Los Angeles County Mental Health Court for evaluations of her competency. She was interviewed by a Dr. Sharma, who opined in no uncertain terms that Ms. Alisa Spitzberg was incompetent to stand trial. When Ms. Spitzberg learned this, she fled the Courthouse and a warrant for her arrest was issued.

After receiving this information from Mrs. Henya Spitzberg, I made immediate efforts to free her from custody. The transcripts from the numerous hearings which were held in Department 95 over the course of more than a month show that I made multiple bail motions, which were all denied without prejudice by Judge Stratton.  In the meantime, a second court-appointed doctor again opined that Ms. Spitzberg was incompetent to stand trial. It was only after exhaustive efforts I made to procure two of my own experts who concluded she was not incompetent that the District Attorney reluctantly agreed to stipulate to her competentcy. As such, criminal proceedings were reinstituted.

In or about December, 2009, the day after the District Attorney agreed to stipulate to competency, the arrignment court Judge back at the criminal courts building agreed to give Ms. Spitzberg $10,000.00 bail at my request. While I asked that Ms. Spitzberg be released upon her promise to appear ("O.R."), as had occured earlier in the case, the Judge declined that request in light of Ms. Spitzberg's wilful disobeyance of the Judge's order that she report to Department 95 until notified otherwise.

Over the next several weeks, I spent exhaustive amounts of time reading the voluminous police reports, search warrants, prior court transcripts, and other discovery materials available in an effort to fully and intimately understand the case. At the same time, I received numerous badgering phone calls from Ms. Spitzberg, her sister Lauren, and her mother Henya, as well as voluminious, irrelevant documents, including court transcripts from prior hearings from them, which they demanded I review. These documents dealt with issues that had absolutely no relevance to the merits of the case itself, but I nonetheless spent considerable time reviewing them to apieze the Spitzbergs. Out of respect for the attorney-client relationship, I will not restate the contents of any specific discussions held with Ms. Spitzberg. However, I will say that Ms. Spitzberg was pushy, rude, demanding, non-lienear in thought, and unreasonable. She could never focus on the issues that were critical to her defense, and instead continually and irrationally harped upon how everyone was out to get her, how this was all some kind of cruel conspiracy, how the numerous judges involved were corrupt, as were the City Attorneys and Police Officers who were involved.

At some point in January 2009, I had several discussions with the assigned City Attorney, Martin Boags, with an eye towards resolving the case in a manner which would best protect Ms. Spitzberg's interests. Following those discussions, Mr. Boags offered to dismiss the charges against Ms. Spitzberg if she 1) stayed out of trouble for a year, 2) attended regular mental health therapy, and 3) had no contact with Ms. Notaro and the other protected parties.  The evening before the next court hearing before the Honorable Judge Villar, I advised Ms. Spitzberg in my office of this offer because I had a moral and ethical obligation to do so. Upon doing so, Ms. Spitzberg became irrate and accused me of, amongst other things, backstabbing her, and being "in on the conspiracy with the rest of them." I told Ms. Spitzberg that I had no such motive or intention, and was simply conveying the information I received to her. I told her she was under no obligation to accept the offer, and if she did not want to, she could go to trial. I also advised her, however, that if she went to trial and lost, she would surely face a period of incarceration the County Jail, amongst other punitive features.

The next morning in court, I advised the Judge about the terms of Mr. Boag's offer, a standard practice, and I put on the record the same non-privileged information I gave Ms. Spitzberg the night before. I also advised the Judge that I was happy to try the case for Ms. Spitzberg, but I was currently engaged in a felony trial in the same court house which had legal priority. Over Ms. Spitzberg's objection, the Judge granted a continuance.

Following the Court hearing, Ms. Spitzberg confronted me in the hallway and proceeded to threaten and belittle me. Amongst other things, she mocked the law school I attended, and threated to destroy my career by posting slanderous material on the internet. I told her that her behavior was unnacceptable, and that because she threatened me, she created a conflict of interest such that I could no longer morally or ethically represent her. Shortly thereafter, I made a motion to withdraw from her representation due to that conflict of interest, and that motion was granted by Judge Villar. Judge Villar then appointed the Public Defender's Office to represent her.

At some point earlier this year, the case went to trial. While I am not certain of the specifics, I do know that the jury hung 11-1 in favor of guilt. The City Attorney's Office has not refiled the case, but the Judge left the civil restraining order in effect, which still stands today. Based upon information and belief, it is my understanding that following this outcome, Ms. Spitzberg threatened her public defender and had to be forcefully removed from the Public Defender's Office.

Ms. Spitzberg has now filed a baseless, meritless malpractice suit against me, which my legal counsel advises me she cannot win since she cannot prove factual innocense. Because the matter is pending, I cannot address it further.

This whole experience is regrettable. I take my job very seriously, and have never - and will never - do anything purosefully harmful to any of my clients. I zestfully represented Ms. Spitzberg, but because of her mental illness, there was absolutely nothing I could have done which would have satisfied her. I am now in the unfortunate position of having to protect my good name, reputation, and character; but I will do whatever is necessary to do so.

Ms. Alisa Spitzberg is a disturbed character assassin, and anyone who has dealt with her would attest to that characterization. She notoriously hides behind the seeming annoymity of the internet, and not surprisingly, did not use her name when creating these supposed "Rip Off Reports" against me. In addition, she has slandered and defamed the good names of numerous other people who were connected with this matter, including:

The Honorable Gerald Rosenberg in Department West A; The Honorable Judge Villar in Department Central 56; The Honorable Judge Jessner in Department Central 40; the Honorable Judge Stratton in Department 95; Deputy Los Angeles City Attorneys Martin Boags, Jennifer Waxler, and Felise Cohen Kalpakian; 47-year veteran Defense Attorney Peter Knecht; and others.

Ms. Spitzberg's disturbed, psychotic rants are openly plastered on the internet, including popular bloging site www.open.salon.com (see, for instance, http://open.salon.com/blog/fernsy/2010/06/17/trying_to_make_injustice_sexy_one_post_at_a_time)

If anyone has any further questions or concerns, feel free to address them to my office. To the extent I can ethically and legally do so, I am happy to discuss these meritless allegations further upon request.