Apart from the sensationally misleading but technically accurate title to this article, the rest is straight and not intended to be sarcastic.
Certainly readers here have seen criticism from the bully pulpit of the Obama Conspiracy Theories blog of the filings in the Kerchner v Obama lawsuit, filings submitted under the signature of Mario Apuzzo, Esq. You have also seen criticism of articles on his blog, and of comments he made here.
Readers will also have seen criticism of Mr. Apuzzo personally, although I hope not by me. Comments have been made against his law practice (DWI lawyer) and his career in general (mediocre). I don’t hold with such ad hominem attacks both because they include biased reporting lacking proper citation, and further because they are irrelevant to the conspiracy theories which are the subject matter of this blog.
This brings me to the subject of this article, Mr. Apuzzo’s win. I have no idea how many if any DWI cases Apuzzo has defended, but he has also represented plaintiffs in immigration cases, one of which was the case of Guedes-Munoz v Atty Gen USA that was heard by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. I can’t judge the complexity of the case, or the brilliance of Apuzzo’s filings, but it looks like he won.
Good for him.
Which may be testament to a well known theory of legal practice that one should stay in their lane. In other words stick with what you know and are good at.
Thanks for your comment. I see your site has a remarkably comprehensive and informative article about Lt. Col. Lakin. Wow!
Mr. Apuzzo is a professional lawyer, unlike Orly Taitz. However, with all Obama birth conspiracy theorist he was more interested in looking for what wasn’t there than what was there. Let us hope he stick to what he knows best.
Excellent point.
And I too enjoyed your site. I see you got buttered up but not in a good way.
Apuzzo was a regular lawyer before going birther. (Berg, too, before he went truther and birther.) Some success is to be expected. My personal favorite Apuzzo victory is Monroe Township Council v. Garibaldi, 216 N.J. Super. Ct. 19 (1987), where he successfully litigated to keep his own job.
OTOH, Kreep and Pidgeon are mainly “advocacy” lawyers; they don’t have a strong track record.
Taitz and Donofrio: Didn’t really work as lawyers.
I honestly fail to see the relevance.
Bernie Madoff was once a decent asset management guy, before he decided to take a shortcut through ponziland.
There are plenty of folks who were or are decent at their job, until they turn to the dark side. Mario’s competence only makes the criticism of his involvement with the birther movement more condemnable, not less.
I certainly appreciate your honesty and integrity in not discussing the comments that have been made about your occupation (pig farmer) and calling yourself, “Dr.” when you don’t have a doctorate (fraud). Such things are irrelevant to the Birther Blather which is the subject of this blog.
It’s a motion for permission to file an Amicus Curiae brief … “*Motion to file leave of Amicus Curiae is respectfully submitted if applicable in UCMJ.”
The email is a courtesy copy to be followed by a hard copy.
Requests to file Amicus Curiae briefs are granted in UCMJ cases frequently. Why would the UCMJ be afraid of truthful information? A man’s freedom and civil liberties are at stake and you want to nail him on a technicality.
Lakin is asking Obama to publicly produced an exact copy of the document he has published on the internet. If it’s not a forgery, then what is the problem?
Sven, quite simply the charges filed on LTC Lakin are unrelated to the President’s eligibility for holding office. The President’s birth information is also irrelevant to the proceedings.
If you don’t believe this, you’re about to find out.
You still won’t believe it , of course. How silly is the truth?
“Unlike in Alice in Wonderland, simply saying something is so does not make it so.”
– U.S. District Court Judge Clay Land
Doc clearly states he doesn’t have a doctorate. If you bothered to read the introduction to the site you would know that. As for frauds people like Pollarik and techdude claim to have credentials they do not have. This would be a fraud. Keep trying Petjake
Yeah some technicality, the guy has already admitted he failed to follow orders. That is an admission of guilt and he deserves to have the full force of the law in regards to the charge be carried out. Obama’s birth certificate has nothing to do with Lakin’s failure to follow the orders of his direct superior.
I demand to see the medical licenses or PhDs for Drs. Dre, J and Pepper.
Honestly Hormone Stallone, it is time for you to do some honest research.
“As a matter of procedure amicus filings are not accepted at the pretrial or trial level. Amicus pleadings are permissible at the appellate level with consent.”
No Obama’s freedom and civil liberties are okay.
Oh, sorry you are talking about Lakin who seems to have knowingly disobeyed his orders. He has the freedom to disobey orders, and he will get a fair court martial. Well as fair as getting fired from your job for blatant violating the rules.
What about Dr. Slice? Can’t leave him out.
Lakin is entitled to an affirmative defense and it is up to a jury of his peers to decide whether or not the affirmative defense exonerates the defendant, not a judge.
So, for the chattering class parroting others … it means Lakin can state he’s not guilty because the President won’t show his birth certificate and it is up to the jury to decide if Lakin’s defense is valid.
Incorrect. He can make up any delusional bit he wants, sure, including the dog ate his deployment orders. The fact remains Obama being president has nothing to do with his failure to follow orders coming from his direct superior.
Bzzzzzzzt.
Not relevant, Sven Thanks for playing. Next stop for Lakin is a DD and possible fine and/or imprisonment. The best thing Lakin could probably do is keep his mouth shut and hire a qualified attorney.
“So, for the chattering class parroting others . . .”
Too ironic coming from a hardcore birther.
I don’t follow your logic.
You claim to know whether I have a doctorate or not. Since you’re not a personal contact of mine, nor have any special knowledge, then the fact that I do not have a doctorate must be generally known. If it is generally known, that must be because I chose to disclose that fact. And if I disclosed it, then I am not misrepresenting myself and therefore not a fraud. “Dr. Conspiracy” is a character whose name is in the genre of the “Dr. Science” character.
Also the guy at the pizza place calls me “Dr.” too, for a reason that I have not been able to determine.
I do, however, have a real masters degree in statistics, unlike some folks I know.
As for my occupation, didn’t you know? I make COLB’s for a living. 🙄
And House, Who, Strangelove, Lecter, Evil, Nick Riviera, Zoidberg and Moreau.
Question for the people for whom IANAL does not apply: It seems to me that if the prosecution shows the video wherein Lakin says he is going to disobey orders then that would be a tactical error because it would open up the defense to bring in the reasons for the disobedience. Is that correct? If that is so it may be the reason for making the videos in hopes that the prosecution would blunder.
And Driscoll wouldn’t let the dog testify … no way Lakin can get a fair trial.
It’s a fast track to an appeal.
not exactly. lakin will be in front of a panel of officers, not a jury as we are used to in a civilian court.
Moving the goalposts. Classic birther stupidity.
“no way Lakin can get a fair trial”
Are you a lawyer?
Guedes-Munoz v Atty Gen USA
Doc: I can’t find any info about this case. Can you link to your source? Thanks.
Maybe in your world Dogs would be able to testify in court and can talk, but in the real world they do not. Lakin is being tried by other officers. He already admitted he’s guilty, there is no defense Lakin can posit that says he can ignore facially valid orders from a direct superior.
And he forgot Gene Simmons…because they call him Doctor Love.
I had to go directly to the Third Circuit ECF Filing system to get this. PACER account required. Then I searched for Attorney: Apuzzo. The case is number 05-3881. The initial order of the court was:
And then about 4 months later, this came out:
Well, that case wasn’t heard at the 3d Circuit. A petition was originally filed in the 3d Circuit, but the court realized petitioner had a potentially meritorious claim, stayed proceedings to allow the agency to do its thing, and then remanded the case back down (with instructions to dismiss as moot) once the petitioner convinced the agency to adjust his status to that of lawful permanent resident.
As for the merits, not terribly difficult. The petitioner is a Cuban refugee, and as such, can lawfully immigrate to the United States in a manner that citizens from other countries can’t. Counsel (Apuzzo?) messed up and didn’t plea the case properly when it was originally filed in the immigration court. If Apuzzo did recognize this oversight, while certainly beneficial to his client, doing so was not particularly difficult. Without reading the briefs, it is unclear if Apuzzo even recognized the problem, or if the court did on its own accord.
They use to just throw water on a fire. Like a typical conspiracy theorist can think outside your narrow view point. Nor, take the time to research and read the material.
Hey, I’m trying to throw Mario a bone here.
Now that’s Apuzzo’s back, perhaps he can answer when he entered this case. Did he file anything with the IJ? The BIA?
You forgot Weird. How could you forget Dr. Weird?
Killer corn!
And Zaius, Demento, Seuss, Zhivago, Jekyll, Dolittle, and No.
It just occurred to me. We often rather jokingly refer to the client’s sentencing case at court-martial as the dog and pony show. There’s got be a really good pun in there somewhere but my British humor is about to crash for the night.
Cheers.