#20
Fri, December 20, 2002
60 million dollar verdict against Irvin and the Arizona Corporation Commission for acts of corruption in Southwest Gas case. This at the very least helps establish a serious precedent for corruption in the ACC for fraud.
http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/business/12_19_02irvin.html
#30
Fri, December 20, 2002
60 million dollar verdict against Irvin and the Arizona Corporation Commission for acts of corruption in Southwest Gas case. This at the very least helps establish a serious precedent for corruption in the ACC for fraud.
http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/business/12_19_02irvin.html
#40
Fri, December 20, 2002
60 million dollar verdict against Irvin and the Arizona Corporation Commission for acts of corruption in Southwest Gas case. This at the very least helps establish a serious precedent for corruption in the ACC for fraud.
http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/business/12_19_02irvin.html
#50
Fri, December 20, 2002
60 million dollar verdict against Irvin and the Arizona Corporation Commission for acts of corruption in Southwest Gas case. This at the very least helps establish a serious precedent for corruption in the ACC for fraud.
http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/business/12_19_02irvin.html
#60
Fri, November 29, 2002
Well taled about in the rebuttal our old bisiness and personal attorneys used to be Streich Lang and they were a train wreck.
In regards to our case we are now fighting in 3 different courts and it is funny now everyone is trying to make it so we cannot use any of the evidence in regards to mishandling by the State of Arizona appointed receiver Lawrence J. Warfield as receiver of our estate. We have been saying for years that he has done things wrong and not preserved and protected our assets big time and now everyone it seems is trying to not allow any sort of testimony of defense when it comes to Lawrence J. Warfield at all in any situation. I wonder WHY?
The State of Arizona appointed receiver Lawrence J. Warfield has also taken over 2 other cases this year and things are going down the same path of disaster. The two companies are RDI and CP Nutritionals! Why is Lawrence J. Warfield being allowed to take control of another two companies with millions in assets. I keep asking myself...WHY?
Mark
Donna
Glendale,#7Consumer Comment
Mon, November 25, 2002
If you you've ever heard of the Spann family debacle, you'd understand how Napolitano's "friends" can get away with their crimes. Many lawyers and politicians and one holding company of APS, (Pinnacle West) using crooked US Marshalls, took all their land away and gave them a measly offer for land real close to the airport.
This was not a comndemnation for public use, but for a bank that wanted to lease the property that Pinnacle West developed. The Mayor for the City of Phoenix was involved, the attorney general's ofc. and a host of attorneys, including one who is now the mayor or is it governor of Las Vegas/Nevada.
These people got screwed and lost their parents right after the false arrest of two of their children. So I'm not surprised of the power of these ruthless people to screw the public. I will however remember the names of the lawyers, the law firm (Streich Lang) and of course Napolitno, who of course, I did not vote for.
Just call me Blonde Justice
#80
Sun, October 13, 2002
10/13/02: Sunday
We all received the letter that went out to the supposed victims of this whole thing from some loyal supporters and investors.
The letter stated that a rule 11 motion was initiated by the Attorney General Janet Napolitano on our behalf based on our claims of of as well as evidece we all supplied including medical records and evidence.
THIS IS A BOLD FACE LIE ON THE PART OF THE ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICE.
WOW!!! I cannot believe the State would lie like this just to get what they wanted. No one on our case asked for a
Rule 11 based on mental illness or any other reason.
No one on our case did not supply anything like medical records or evidence. We do not have that evidence, plain and simple.
The first anyone on our case heard about this was a few days ago and we all read up on Rule 11 just this last week. Our attorneys and us went through the Rule on Monday, last week.
We all felt we might be able to use Rule 11.2 upon further reading of the rule on Monday, but we did not file anything. Rule 11.2 states possibly that the drugs prescribed by Shelly Susman-Breen caused diminished capacity, but not mental illness at the time of the supposed offenses.
We all found that all the counts except 2 are all between February 1999-June 2000. This is the exact time of the overmedicated by Shelly Susman-Breen with a myriad of potentially deadly medication.
We all have never claimed any sort of mental illness. We all have claimed overmedication in the past, but this has never been filed and has just been discussed recently with counsel.
It seems like we are being forced into a mental illness Rule 11 motion if we want to have our diminished capacity or over medication theory looked at. Our attorneys have stated that there are two criteria for mental competence. 1. Not able to understand court proceedings including right and wrong and 2. not able to assist in ones defense. our attorneys do not believe either of these criterion are met at all. Now, you can also look back to the time of the offenses... there was diminished
capacity thanks to over medication.
How can the State of Arizona say we asked for this and we provided evidence...THIS IS 100% FICTION...this is malicious prosecution and FRAUD!
The steps cornered animals will go through to not get caught...I
cannot believe the state is this cornered that they need to resolve to these kind of tactics.