Lawsuit Against a Filmmaker Documentary

[adamr316]

So you think a privatized justice system would be more equitable? I'll be the first to admit that our justice system is far from perfect. While it's not perfect it works most of the time. A privatized system by it's very nature would be unjust. Justice is not blind when shareholders have a stake in the game.

Regarding your on going inflated drama, know when to cut your losses.

That's my libertarian viewpoint speaking, LOL! There should just be more accountability with our justice system is really all I'm saying. And in Maryland, at least in Baltimore, any time judges are up for re-election they almost always 95% of the time run unopposed. A little strange if you ask me.

My losses will be cut once the documentary is released "into the wild."

 

[adamr316]

Once the original court has issued a ruling, that's it. You don't get a second chance to retry the same facts. They sued you and won. You don't get the chance to turn around after the fact and sue them back on the same matter.

In Maryland, small claims trials are de novo. So I did have a second chance. Facts were layed out clearly. The BIGGEST reason I lost is because I didn't have a lawyer. The facts *should* stand on their own but they don't. This is a big problem because there is no such thing as public defenders in civil trials.

It wouldn't be the same case...it would be for perjury or something else. They outright lied in regards to key testimony. I have a voicemail that proves this. That affected the case in a material way so the case can be made in front of a more competent judge. I doubt this will ever come to fruition but who knows? I just want it out there to steer clear from these individuals.

Someone one of the plaintiffs worked with creatively contacted me last year. They had the same type of experience as me...luckily they couldn't/didn't get sued. They also badmouthed the hand that feeds (a company that sends them A LOT of work) so that's just the type of people they are.

The whole situation is ridiculous and the story must be told. The trial was going to be held on a major TV court show but the plaintiffs didn't agree to go on. The ironic part is they would have received their money quicker if they had. If they would have even won, that is. I have more faith in the TV judges than I do for the "real judges", in my case anyway.

And if anyone is wondering, yes I will be inviting the judges to be interviewed on camera. I'd really like to know their reasoning behind their decisions as well as re-examining the evidence/testimony during both trials. Slim chance they'll agree to it though...very slim.

 

[adamr316]

Dude, I'd think about making the documentary a little more... um... less boring maybe? It was one of the most sterile presentations I've ever heard. Hopefully the full documentary is more engaging than the trailer makes it appear?

Music will spice it up That wasn't a trailer, it was the first 5 minutes of the video. Any suggestions to make a serious subject less boring?

I'm thinking some woosh sound effects, wind chimes and that rattle snake sound effect. And no cuts longer than 2 seconds. Make stuff black and white or sepia toned for no apparent reason and do a flash frame effect with a vignette filter for sizzle.

Seriously though, with such a complicated subject you need to leave everything in. This film is not for people with ADHD. If you're not used to watching shows like Dateline or 60 Minutes then it may not be entertaining enough for you...sorry!

 

[adamr316]

This kind of thing sucks hardcore, but the other guys are right that it's best to move on rather than lose more time.

I'll give you an example on a far smaller scale, but I promise you there is no justice in PLENTY of these small cases, but I'd say most of the cases involving you versus the government, which was my case.

I got pulled over for no apparent reason just two blocks from where I live. Busy L.A. intersection actually 20 feet from the Staples Center. Anyway, I'm wondering huh what did I do? Didn't run a red. Didn't speed, I was going pretty darn slow, haha. The LAPD guy tells me that my tags are expired. OH, ugg, then I think huh that's right I'm not sure if I ever remember getting new tags this year (this was last year). He tells me my registration is expired and I said oh dang, seriously? I didn't know that... Anyway, I get a ticket, and I call the DMV about it and they tell me that, no, that's not true, my registration is NOT expired. But my tags were never sent. I asked what do you mean? The lady says, "I'm not sure, I'm sorry about this, it appears we did receive payment from you back in January, but you were never sent your tags." "Umm... why not? I just got pulled over and issued a $272 ticket because you didn't send me the freakin' tags I paid for!" "I'm sorry sir I can't really tell you why, they were supposed to be sent, it must have been some sort of processing error." I know better than to argue with these people, it's not her fault, so I said, "Alright well... ok, so do I just come in? I really need some sort of proof of registration here so I can show the court that this was a bogus ticket and it was just a misunderstanding." She tells me that they can't even issue something like that, "But the LAPD and the court system both have full access to DMV records, they can tell you were registered properly no problem, they can pull it up in a few seconds." "Oh... ok... well, thanks." So I go get my new tags, and I appeal my ticket by written declaration citing a specific section of the California Vehicle Code stating *specifically* what I was cited for, they wrote down the number, and having looked it up myself (I majored in philosophy and that means we took a number of classes that pre-law majors do as well) I analyzed the language and found that it says nothing about displaying proper tags.

In point of fact, there is NO SUCH LAW stating you must display proper tags, and the officer never said so or wrote that either, it said "Unregistered vehicle CVC 6.74" or whatever the heck the number was on that code. So I quoted the law, I wrote that I was not in violation of said law, and that furthermore the officers should have used their computers to verify my registration before pulling me over or at least after pulling me over. Long story short, those tags are only there to avoid a situation like this -- to tell the officers you are registered, so you don't get pulled over like I did. But they're not there for legal reasons. The only legal requirement is that your vehicle is registered, not that you prove it is registered by putting a sticker on your car. It's not like insurance, where now you actually do have to provide valid proof of insurance when asked for it by an officer of the peace (that wasn't the case before either, though -- you simply had to have insurance, not be able to prove it when pulled over, but they changed that).

Anyway, I am a professional writer, and I do have a lot of experience in law related issues, and I decided to do a trial by written declaration, included all of the relevant facts and laws, and explained the situation. About 8 months later, no joke, I get a simple form saying that my request was denied.

I'm angry about it, sure, I know that I'm right beyond any reasonable doubt, and I'm frustrated our system of justice doesn't work better because it's unacceptable in my mind to fine people without reason or to pull them over without justification when this technology is all readily available to them. They were junior officers, stuck on traffic duty, without knowledge of the law. It's unacceptable for police officers not to know the law -- that's their JOB. It'd be like as a director if I didn't know any union rules. That would make me an amateur. Yet at the same time, I am not going to screw with that $272 I lost because the fact is, I can't do much about it. It's not worth my time to contest it further or to put up a big stink about it. If I had $100 million I would hire an attorney or have my own on staff and I'd sue them for harassment and basically put up a huge stink about it, through the lawyer not myself, so that I wasted the government's time, called attention to the issue in public, and generally made them sorry for trying to extract that money. They'd end up paying it back or wasting enough time it was lost money on their end. And if I spent $25,000 for that $272 I wouldn't care because I'd have enough money I could afford to spend that on my principles alone. But the fact is most of us don't have that much money or that much time to dick around with these fools.

So sometimes, all you can do is be angry about it for a bit and let it pass, because it's probably not going to accomplish much to dwell on it.

I'm sorry to hear this, man. If you had your registration set and display of proper tags isn't required it should be an open and shut case. What I've realized though through all of this is the importance of documentation. You should have got the name of the DMV lady. And a written letter from her...never take someone's word for it. It's all about the documentation.

You're wrong though when you say there isn't much you can do about it. It sounds like you've given up. $272...although its a decent chunk of change it's not something I would rip my hair out about either. In my case though it was $5,000 on the line...which is a lot of money to me. I could put a nice down payment on a new car, buy another EX1...whatever with that money.

I bent over backwards for this damn company to make them happy. When I finally put my foot down about extra services, they turned on me. More than anything that is what upset me. The money is a big reason because I DO NOT EVER WANT TO PAY THEM A CENT BACK. The lying about someone who did all this extra work for you. That kills me. That's what strikes my nerve.

These people give themselves cost of living wage increases every year while THEY are the ones who inflate our dollar. They waste our money on stupid things like "I Voted" stickers and then cry that they have to cut the budget. When really it's just lowering the budget back to levels 20-30 years ago.

That's the lawmakers though. But it's along the same lines with the judicial system...we the people are being screwed over by the people we employ. If they are not doing a good job, they don't deserve to keep that job. If the court sees proof that your car was registered prior to the traffic stop, the ticket should be dismissed. But see all these little fines add up to big bucks. That's how they get you. That's how they get US!

You either stand up against it or you live with it. I'll say it again, I do not feel like I am wasting my time. Even if I am in the end it's time better spent than being pacified in front of the TV or computer screen watching people get Rick Rolled on YouTube.

I'm taking the road less traveled...I'll see y'all on the other side. For anyone who wants to join me, free beer and good conversation! LOL...

 

[adamr316]

The full documentary is up at http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?244514-Court-Hell-One-Filmmaker-s-Journey

My experience has inspired a "Judicial Accountability" bill for the state of Maryland. I received positive reception down in Annapolis (the capital) and it may be voted on next year if I can drum up enough support. It's pretty simple...hold all judges as accountable as lawmakers. If I can view a legislator's voting record from the comfort of my home then the same should apply to the folks in black robes.

One of the judges in my case let a drunk driver off the hook, only to have his decision overturned unanimously by seven judges of the appeals court. I'll be looking deeper into his record to see if there is a record of legal incompetence. The judicial accountability bill I speak of would make it much easier to see the level of ineptness.