, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Beaumont, Texas, attorney John S. Morgan, the attorney for BullyVille / James McGibney (who we don’t like), has lost yet another legal battle against American Hero & Honorary Admin of the BV Files Houston attorney Jeffrey Dorrell. 

According to Nederland, TX blogger Philip Klein, Dorrell won on account of a major assist from American Hero & Honorary Admin of the BV Files Thomas Retzlaff, resident of Scottsdale, AZ and San Antonio, TX.


SPECIAL UPDATE:  April 28, 2017, at 1545 hrs UTC.


Morgan is not happy about Judge Tommy Chambers.  So just two hours before the sanctions hearing he filed a letter announcing his intention to seek the recusal of Judge Chambers because Morgan feels that the Aryan Brotherhood are now directing the outcome of this case.  CHECK IT OUT!!!






Judge Olen Underwood


FUN FACT:  Olen Underwood is a former American college and professional football player. A linebacker, he played college football at the University of Texas at Austin, and played professionally for the NY Giants, Houston Oilers, and Denver Broncos from 1965 through 1971.  In 1980, he took the bench of the 284th District Court for the State of Texas, and held that elected position until retiring in 2005.  In 1996, he was appointed by Governor George W. Bush to be the presiding judge of the Second Administrative Judicial Region of Texas.



 It seems that Judge Underwood is kind of a lazy judge.  Notice how he uses cut & paste on his forms?  Only in this case, he forget to change some of the wording from the last time he used this form – lol.


Recall that for many, many months both John Morgan and James McGibney (who we don’t like) have claimed publicly that they no longer work with each other, that Morgan was only McGibney’s attorney in the Texas LOLsuit for a “brief” period of time, and how they have nothing to do with each other now?  Yet here we have actual EVIDENCE that they are exchanging emails and phone calls with one another, and are still working together on all of these different SLAPP suits.

Sounds like a conspiracy to us, your Admins at the BV Files.  But it is a pretty sorry, lame-ass conspiracy of three drug addicts who like to sexually blackmail and abuse little girls:  Philip Klein, John Morgan, and James McGibney (who we don’t like).





If you are a client of John Morgan’s, or a potential client, we here at the BV Files would urge you to run – don’t walk – away from Morgan as fast as you can!  DO NOT HIRE THIS MAN!



American Hero & Honorary Admin of the BV Files Joseph (Jo Jo) Camp is presently in jail in Jefferson County, Colorado, and he could use some help in buying some ice cream, cookies, and stuff like that as he awaits trial.

Several people have asked how to send him some money.  Okay here is all the info on how to do it – the BEST way is with the electronic service.

His name is Joseph Camp and his Inmate # is P01102062 (those are all zeroes.)

How to send money to Jo Jo Camp





The California Supreme Court has started reviewing the ViaView, Inc. v. Retzlaff case.  As our long time readers will recall, that case is the San Jose restraining order case that McGibney lost against Retzlaff last July 2016.  The California Sixth District Court of Appeal ruled in Retzlaff’s favor and dismissed McGibney’s lawsuit for lack of personal jurisdiction.  However, because they felt that they had no jurisdiction over the case, the appellate court declined to rule on Retzlaff’s request for anti-SLAPP sanctions.

The California Supreme Court is being asked to grant review on the basis that, irrespective as to whether or not a court has jurisdiction over the parties, it still has the power to award sanctions for the filing of a SLAPP suit.

ViaView’s attorney, Jay Leiderman, has until May 15, 2017, to file a response.


She likes putting things into her mouth


Philip Klein has a daughter named Caroline Klein-Gear and she needs money, and seems perfectly willing to prostitute herself on her father’s behalf in order to raise the money necessary to keep them feed while their so-called “private detective” business is under attack by some very mean lawyers who want to put them all out of business.

Drunk and willing to do anything for money

But what Caroline does not tell you in this video is the fact that both she and her father are a couple of traveling scam artists who rip off the families of missing children by taking their monies and then running off.



Depending on the type of web browser you are using, a sexy video of sexy Carol doing some sexy nasty things with her mouth will pop up for your viewing pleasure.

Try Internet Explorer IF YOU DO NOT SEE THE VIDEO.



If anyone is in need of some expert psychological help from someone who claims to be a psychologist – but who is really an unlicensed FRAUD – please look her up!

Caroline’s home address


To help Caroline out with her fund raising activities, your Admins at the BV Files have helpfully posted her video over on PornHub and XVideos.com along with her home and work addresses so people will know where to send in their monies.



PRO TIP:  The next time Caroline makes a video she needs to show a little bit more cleavage.




Google hates Philip Klein – 100% VERIFIED!







Funny how Klein claims to be sooo upset about Dorrell contacting him, but Klein does not seem to have any trouble at all sending off super, scary emails to other people when it suits him. 

Beaumont, TX private investigator Philip R. Klein


This is an email Klein sent off to Retzlaff’s father on September 21, 2015.  Now keep in mind that TR’s father is part owner of a chain of medium sized newspapers and television stations in the Upper Mid-west and has been in the newspaper business for over 60 years (seriously!).  Do you think that this is the first such intimidation email that he has ever received?  CHECK IT OUT!!!



If paper is put out on him I am going to hunt him down like a dog – and will assist in his arrest. I am not kidding – I am serious – and I am done with your son.

— Says Philip Klein to Retzlaff’s father.






Unfortunately for Klein, there are several obstacles in his way that he first must get through in order to reach is goal of getting TR.  SO GOOD LUCK, PHIL KLEIN!!

This image comes entirely from the Bullyville.com website – so take it with a heavy grain of salt


Klein, like James McGibney (who we don’t like) before him, has found that some people simply cannot be intimidated by him or his nonsense.  BUT THANKS FOR PLAYING!!




As many of you will recall, oral arguments have been scheduled for May 23, 2017, in front of the Second Court of Appeals in Fort Worth, Texas, with regards to the appeal filed by sexual blackmail company ViaView, Inc. and its owner, San Jose, CA, based revenge pornographer James McGibney (who we don’t like).

Less than 10% of all appeals in Texas get to have oral arguments.  So it is a REALLY BIG DEAL when your case gets to have it.

The problem is that McGibney has hired an idiot and a drug addict for an attorney to handle this case.  That is the reason why he and ViaView were hit with over $450,000 in sanctions and attorney’s fees last year.


Evan Stone (aka Evan Flournoy) (who we don’t like)


Just to clue you all in on how much of a dummy Stone is, the above photo is the official State Bar of Texas photograph that Stone uses on the State Bar’s website as his profile picture.



FUN FACT:  Other than ‘handling’ his own appeal in the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (in which Stone was hit with over $25,000 in sanctions for sending out a whole bunch of illegal subpoenas in a copyright trolling case), Stone has never handled any other appeal, in either state or federal court.  This is his first ever appeal for any client ever.


So now that the Big Day is rapidly approaching, Stone wants to blow off the entire Court of Appeals by telling them that he has got better things to do then sit around preparing for Oral Argument (which only lasts 15 minutes, by the way).  Instead he is planning on attending some stupid conference with other nerds & retards and wants to get his smoke on (which BV Files’ Admin Mike totally understands, what with him also being a “medical” marijuana user, too).


The problem Stone does not seem to understand is that the Court of Appeals schedules these things out weeks and sometimes months in advance.  They don’t do “continuances” or re-booking requests.  But what they do do is they CANCEL arguments instead and simply go onto the next case.





Yeah, this guy does not look like a total fag, right?












Beaumont Court of Appeals Chief Justice Steve McKeithen

Judge McKeithen does not like drug addicts or retards.  And he most especially does not like BullyVille attorney John Morgan, who is both!

So here is his decision just released at 8am CDT on April 28, so just 5 minutes old at the time we posted this (and how do we get these documents so quickly?!?).


And here is the appellate court’s Mandate, which means the case is back on fast-track today and there will be a hearing at 1:30pm CDT where SLAPP sanctions and more will be taken up against Morgan.



As our longtime readers will recall, Retzlaff was named Hanzen Laporte’s Employee Of The Year for 2016 for his role in managing and directing their Death Threats Litigation Department towards record setting revenues!


Houston attorneys Anthony Laporte – Jeff Dorrell – Kent Hanszen



This is a brand new Press Release in a brand new case that they just won.  CHECK IT OUT!!





Hanszen Laporte employee Thomas Retzlaff







Freedom of speech and thought lie at the core of liberty.  Though many philosophers, statesmen, and legal practitioners have opined on the value of free speech and thought, Justice Louis Brandies best captured the value of free speech and thought in our constitutional scheme:

Those who won our independence believed that the final end of the state was to make [people] free to develop their faculties, and that in its government the deliberative forces should prevail over the arbitrary. . . They believed that freedom to think as you will and speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth; that without free speech and assembly discussion would be futile; that with them, discussion affords ordinarily adequate protection against the dissemination of noxious doctrine; that the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people; that public discussion is a political duty; and that this should be a fundamental principle of American government.

Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357, 375 (1927) (Brandeis, J., concurring).

Despite its central place in our constitutional scheme, the right to free speech is extremely fragile. Government imposed limitations to speech and thought sometimes elude detection, because government does not always directly regulate speech and, even when it does, the limitations are not always obvious.  Notwithstanding the sometimes opaque nature of direct impositions, a major threat to speech and thought comes from indirect government impositions.


Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) provides one example of an indirect governmentally-imposed limitation to speech and thought.  These are suits brought by one party in an effort to silence another party against whom the suit is filed.  The prototypical SLAPP suit involves a defamation claim against the defendant.  Though government is not directly involved in chilling or silencing the defendant’s speech, the judicial system is the means by which the plaintiff chills or silences the defendant’s speech.  The threat of a potential judgment looming over the defendant implicates the government in the plaintiff’s effort to chill or silence the defendant’s speech.


Texas enacted Anti-SLAPP legislation to curb litigants’ efforts to employ the judicial system as a means to silence or chill another’s speech.  The Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA) provides pretrial procedural checks against litigation designed to chill a party’s right to free speech, among other first Amendment rights.  See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 27.001-011.  The Act allows a party to file a motion to dismiss the case, with an award of attorney fees and costs to the movant if successful on the motion, along with mandatory sanctions to punish the offender.

This procedure is available to any party, regardless of whether it is an individual or entity and regardless of whether the suit is against the person for an act committed in his or her individual capacity or in his or her capacity as a member of the electronic or print media.  There are, however, four exemptions.  Commercial speech falls outside the TCPA.  Suits for bodily injury, wrongful death, or survival also fall outside of the TCPA, as do insurance code suits or actions arising out of insurance contracts.   Enforcement actions by the state also do not fall within the TCPA.  See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 27.010(a)-(d).

The Act also provides pretrial appellate procedural checks against suspected SLAPP suits.  If the party alleging a First Amendment right violation is unsuccessful in his motion to dismiss, that party may take an automatic, accelerated interlocutory appeal on the trial court’s denial of the motion to dismiss.  See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 27.008, 51.014(a)(12).  Again, this appellate procedure is available to any party asserting a violation of his right to free speech, association, or to petition government.




The filing of a motion to dismiss under the TCPA triggers a three-step burden shifting mechanism. 

Number One: The person filing the TCPA motion to dismiss (called the ‘movant’) has the initial burden to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the other guy’s (i.e. ‘non-movant’) “legal action is based on, relates to, or is in response to the movant’s exercise of: (1) the right of free speech; (2) the right to petition; or (3) the right of association.”  See Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code section 27.005(b).

Number Two: Once the movant satisfied this burden, the trial court was required to dismiss the legal action unless the non-movant “establishes by clear and specific evidence a prima facie case for each essential element of the claim in question.”  See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 27.005(c).

Number Three: If the non-movant satisfies his burden, the burden then shifts back to movant to establish by a preponderance of the evidence each essential element of a valid defense to the claim.  Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 27.005(d).


In determining whether a non-movant’s claim should be dismissed, the court may consider the pleadings and any supporting and opposing affidavits stating the facts on which the liability or defense is based.  Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 27.006(a); see In re Lipsky, 460 S.W.3d 579, 587 (Tex. 2015) (orig. proceeding); see also Rio Grande H2O Guardian v. Robert Muller Family P’ship Ltd., No. 04-13-00441-CV, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 915, 2014 WL 309776, at *3 (Tex. App.–San Antonio Jan. 29, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op.) (stating that “[u]nlike other types of cases where pleadings are not considered evidence, section 27.006 of the Act, which is entitled ‘Evidence,’ expressly provides . . . the court shall consider the pleadings” as evidence in determining whether the legal action should be dismissed).  The trial court does not hear live testimony.  In re
Lipsky, 460 S.W.3d at 587.

The appellate court conducts a de novo review of the trial court’s ruling on a TCPA motion to dismiss.  Herrera v. Stahl, 441 S.W.3d 739, 741 (Tex. App.–San Antonio 2014, no pet.) (appellate court reviews each step of the TCPA analysis de novo).  Which means that the court of appeals looks at everything the trial court did with a completely fresh eye.  This is the most favorable standard of review for a person appealing a case because it allows you to basically get a free do-over of the trial.





Mugshot of John Morgan from the Jefferson County (Texas) Sheriff’s Office

For those that have not been paying attention, James McGibney (who we don’t like) has filed a lawsuit in Ft. Worth, Texas, against EVERYONE who has ever had anything negative to say about McGibney or who has ever disagreed with McGibney in a state court lawsuit styled James McGibney vs The Internets. In that lawsuit filed in the 67th District Court of Tarrant County, Texas, McGibney is represented by an attorney from Beaumont, Texas named John S. Morgan (http://www.jsmorganlaw.com/).

The Morgan Law Firm, a one-man operation, is located at 2175 North St, Ste. 101, Beaumont, TX 77701.

Morgan law office

Now for those of you that don’t know, Morgan is a complete retard, to use a professional legal term from a law book. He is a well-known vexatious litigant in the S.E. Texas region having filed HUNDREDS of frivolous lawsuits, many on behalf of his idiot side-kick, a local PI named Phillip R. Klein (http://operationkleinwatch.blogspot.fr/2013/12/philip-r-klein-celebrating-50-lawsuits.html). Klein uses the twitter handle @KICnederland (https://twitter.com/KICnederland). He is a complete retard. Please take a moment to go onto Twitter and tell him so, just in case he forgets, m’kay.

Klein twitter

Please take a moment to check out and follow our very good friends over at Operation Klein Watch (http://operationkleinwatch.blogspot.com/) and Sam the Eagle (http://www.notthisonetoojacques.blogspot.com/).

In an interesting aside, Morgan is representing a group of girls in a lawsuit against GoDaddy.com over being posted on a revenge porn site! (http://www.search.txcourts.gov/Case.aspx?cn=09-13-00285-CV) Morgan utterly failed in that lawsuit and lost big time. Now him and all those stupid girls have been ordered to pay the attorney fees for GoDaddy – something that could easily cost them a hundred thousand dollars or more. Nice work, Morgan!

Morgan at press conference with the Mr. TeXxXan.com revenge porn girlies in April 2013.


Now, of course, Morgan is representing revenge porn operator McGibney (who we don’t like) and ViaView. Oh the irony!

Anyways, Morgan used to be married to a lady named Kathleen Winslow, who is currently employed with the Travis County District Attorney’s Office as an assistant DA in Austin.  About five years ago Morgan, in a bid to steal custody of his three children from his ex-wife, concocted a scheme whereby he would get his then 13 year old daughter Anne (who is now 18) to falsely accuse her mother of SEXUAL ABUSE.  This caused ALL three of the children, Anne 13 yrs, Joseph 11 yrs, and David 9 yrs, to be removed from the home and then subjected to numerous medical and psychological exams after being placed in foster care!

The bottom line is that the trial court found that Bullyville attorney John Morgan’s “acts and manipulations . . . have placed all of the children at immediate and significant risk of danger to their physical and emotional welfare and caused the children to be in immediate danger in [his presence].” The court further found that Morgan had not acted in the children’s best interest, and that the children’s present circumstances would significantly impair their physical health and emotional welfare. The trial court removed all three children from Morgan’s custody and presence “for the children’s own protection.”

Check out the Court’s Opinion here: Morgan Custody Opinion – 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 2230

When the trial judge asked 13 yr old Anne if she wanted to visit her father, she said, “No. I couldn’t. . . . He scares me. I don’t like him. He is mean, and he lied to me.”

The trial court then made the finding that Morgan had made a false report of child abuse against his ex-wife and stripped him of any custody or visitation. The order also required Morgan to pay a civil penalty of $500 for making a false report of child abuse. Finally, the trial court’s order awarded Kathleen attorney’s fees in the amount of $241,417.59.

Morgan notice of appeal

Morgan filed an appeal of that decision. The 9th Court of Appeals in Beaumont for the most part affirmed the trial court’s order. However, it found that the trial court abused its discretion by prohibiting Morgan from ever having any contact with the children and that it needed to make further inquiries into that issue.

Specific findings that the trial court made with regards to child abuse and false claims of child sexual abuse by Bullyville attorney John Morgan are:

Morgan Findings #2

Morgan Findings #3

Morgan Findings #4

Morgan Findings #5

Morgan Findings

For those of you paying attention and curious, the new John Morgan main-squeeze, Bridgette Bullington, is into some kind of weirdo, new age, crystals and pyramids healing benefits bullshit that might or might not involve the release of sexual “juices”. On her webpage she claims that, “I have the gift of being able to see energy and how it moves and interacts in our physical world. I’ve had this gift of uninterrupted sight since I was a child.” http://www.lightbodyinfusion.com/bridgette-bullington/

That kinda reminds me of another young kid who had a similar gift as what Bridgette claims, such was his gift to see energy and how this FORCE moves and interacts with the physical world. But don’t just dismiss it as old-timey superstition or an ancient religion. Oh, no, Siree! Don’t let to Anakin hear you call it that as he will find your lack of faith disturbing and he’ll choke the life right out of you from half-way across a conference table with a force-choke hold.

force choke

So anyways, for what ever reasons, the court ordered her to have ZERO contact with the kids; thus, Bridgette must be banished.

In our opinion, Morgan can always sell his house at 9 Sandelwood Trail, Beaumont, Texas 77706-7851 to pay his ex-wife’s attorney fees.  It was recently appraised at $163,340 (less the bank’s mortgage).

Morgan’s home


We find it completely hilarious that we have one retard (McGibney) being represented by another retard (Morgan). It is even more funny because both men like to abuse women and children and both men are a couple of raving lunatics with their ridiculous grudges, litigation, and bombastic public threats and statements about their enemies.

SPECIAL UPDATE / CORRECTION: We wish to point out that Morgan did, in fact, file an appeal to this decision with the Texas Supreme Court in case No. 14-0269 (http://www.search.txcourts.gov/Case.aspx?cn=14-0269). That appeal was unsuccessful and, thus, the decision by the appellate court and the trial court has been affirmed and stands.

Here is a link to the Petition for Discretionary Review that Morgan filed with the Texas Supreme Court pro se.  If it were possible to place a rating on a court document, like you do for a movie, we’d rate this one as PG-13 at least due to the child sex references and the obvious drug induced madness of the author. Seriously.

We would direct your attention to Appendix 4 on pg. 83 of the brief, where it appears that James McGibney’s very own attorney, John Morgan, is admitting to having NUDE PHOTOS of his own children, as well as discussions of child sexual activity! OMG!!! Is this yet another link between McGibney and child sexual abuse? This would be at least the second court case involving child sexual abuse allegations that involve people VERY INTIMATELY LINKED to James A. McGibney.



Morgan has nudz


We at the BV Files wonder why this could be.


In addition to the false sexual abuse claim made during the civil child custody case, Morgan decided to double-down and make further reports to the local law enforcement agencies that his ex-wife was a drug user, had lots of drugs, and was always getting high.

See the actual police report right here:





When it came time for Morgan to try to put his scheme into play, he filed a motion with the trial court seeking to gain custody of his three children based on those bogus allegations. Needless to say, it did not end pretty for Morgan.

As a result of Morgan’s actions and a referral by the trial judge to a special prosecutor, on Friday, April 4, 2014, Morgan was forced to accept a plea deal in a criminal case that will likely result in him being stripped of his license to practice law in the state of Texas.

state bar rules

Here are copies of all the charging instruments and plea papers in Morgan’s criminal case. Morgan tried to take the easy way out by pleading “no contest” to the charges. But, as Judge Judy always says, “If you plead guilty, you are guilty!”





A very special thanks and Shout Out to Jerry Jordan over at the SET Investigates website for gathering this material! Please go visit his website for more complete coverage into Morgan’s criminal activities, as well as special updates on who else the Special Prosecutor might be investigating (perhaps a certain dim-witted PI sidekick?) http://setinvestigates.com/

In a not very surprising development, the State Bar of Texas Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel has confirmed that an investigation is being conducted into allegations of professional misconduct, criminal activities, and ethics violations by the attorney representinghttp://setinvestigates.com/ James McGibney (who we don’t like) and ViaView!!




So what happened in this case is that, afterwards when it came time for Morgan to pay the $250,000 in attorney’s fees from the divorce & child custody case, Morgan decided to sue the attorney for his ex-wife instead by claiming that because she released his “sealed” criminal records, Morgan has been defamed.



FUN FACT:  Sheryl Johnson-Todd had nothing to do with the release and posting of Morgan’s criminal records online.  That was all on us, the Admins of the BV Files.  Who do you think got those records into her hands to begin with, dummy???  So if you want someone to sue, come sue us, bitch!


Morgan also sought a restraining order and an injunction against Ms. Johnson-Todd’s attorney, who just happened by some strange (not so strange) coincidence to be none other than American Hero & Honorary Admin of the BV Files Houston attorney Jeff Dorrell!!


This injunction was quickly ruled UNCONSTITUTIONAL by the Beaumont Court of Appeals in a unanimous decision upheld by the Texas Supreme Court.  If you wish to read it, check it out here====>http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20TXCO%2020150303651/JOHNSON-TODD%20v.%20MORGAN


So while that part of the case was taken care if, the other part of the case – the part dealing with the SLAPP aspect of Morgan’s LOLsuit, also needed to be dealt with.

Thus, we have this decision here from the Beaumont Court of Appeals====>http://www.viaviewfiles.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Morgan-Opinion-2015-Tex.App_.-LEXIS-11078.pdf


So on Friday, April 21, 2017, the trial court took up the matter of the anti-SLAPP attorney’s fees and mandatory sanctions that John Morgan would be required to pay.  Here are some preliminary results.  CHECK IT OUT!!


According to failed e-Detective / internet blogger, Philip Klein, here is what happened at last Friday’s hearing:

So last Friday the judge had another hearing and announced to everyone that he was going to award almost $600,000 to Dorrell under the Texas Citizens Participation Act. No we are not kidding – almost $600,000 in attorneys fees and sanctions after he already read the billing – awarded $7,500 and the amounts were paid? And neither attorney whatsoever requested it? 


Klein continues to report:


So hearing this – Morgan files an appeal which stays the case.  Even Mr. Dorrell in a letter acknowledges the Appeal notice and it simply shuts the case and the judge down.  Except this judge who demands that he will continue this case and ignore the appeal notice. 


April 26 email from Judge Chambers’ Court Coordinator


Yes – Judge Tommy Chambers goes against the laws of the State of Texas and refuses to shut the case down until the appeals court rules on the crazy move by the judge? No really – screw the law – I am moving forward says the judge.


So in an unusual – and not commonly seen in the legal community – Morgan filed an “Emergency Motion” with the 9th court of appeals to stop the judge in what he is trying to do. 


SO BV FILES WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE EMERGENCY STAY AND ALL THAT GOOD STUFF? you ask?  Well, just hold on a moment as Admin Mike sets his “medical” marijuana pipe down to cool off a bit while he munches on some donuts.


Because the Court of Appeals dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, Morgan’s request for an emergency stay is moot.

So now everyone is gearing up for a road trip to the Jefferson County Court at Law Number One for the continuation of the SLAPP sanctions hearing from last Friday.


At the conclusion of Klein’s article he complains:

So now we know – someone got to the judge? And threatened the judge? And such is now under investigation by the Texas Attorney Generals office? 

Are you kidding us? And now he makes one of the biggest fines in the history of the State of Texas over $4,300 in real billing? Again – are you kidding us? 


Yes, Klein, someone did “get” to the judge – and that totally sucks for you and your group.  Why do you think the Fort Worth case was so fixed against James McGibney (who we don’t like) right from the very beginning?  Why do you think the Fort Worth Court of Appeals cut word-for-word language from Retzlaff’s brief he filed and used it in their Opinion granting SLAPP sanctions and fees?

Why do you think Judge Cosby signed the order that he was given without a moment’s hesitation?


We here at the BV Files think that it is very funny that you guys are acting all surprised and butt-hurt over a conspiracy against McGibney, Morgan, and Klein to destroy each and everyone of you, your families, and your businesses.  The surprise is not that there is a conspiracy against all you guys.  The surprise is that you guys are only just now realizing that there is a conspiracy against you all and that the deck was stacked against you from the very beginning over three years ago.


And you just now figured that out….




John Morgan will be placed on the witness stand where he will be questioned about statements he has made in court and in court pleadings over the years.  Of specific note is the fact that, last week (April 21) Morgan brought up to Judge Chambers his Aryan Brotherhood Death Threats nonsense again and Morgan told Judge Chambers that he has been “in close contact with the FBI for the past three years” helping them investigate this matter.

So we are quite curious to see Morgan questioned on the specifics of this claim.


Our guess is that he will be a lot like Philip Klein was at his RECENT deposition in Federal court.  CHECK IT OUT!!




March 29, 2016, deposition of Philip Klein in US District Court, case # 1:14-CV-00509 



Pg 171 of Klein’s federal court deposition


In any event, by the end of today it will be the end of John Morgan and his ability to practice law.  So stay tuned to see what happens as updates will be made throughout the day.





FILED APRIL 28, 2017, 5:15pm CDT




For years James McGibney and his revenge porn / blackmail company ViaView have sought the spotlight. But McGibney needs to remember something very, very important: For a man in his position, the spotlight can turn into an interrogation lamp pretty damn fast!


Many thanks to you, our teeming MILLIONS of readers, listeners, and supporters for taking time out of your day to come here and take part in the marketplace of ideas.

0 0 votes
Article Rating