For those of you wondering if Nederland, Texas, based private investigator Philip Klein is really a pedophile who scams families of missing children, we here at the BV Files are not yet able to answer that question. But what we can tell you is that Philip Klein has committed the 3rd Degree felony offense of Aggravated Perjury for telling repeated lies while under oath during a videotaped deposition that took place on November 20, 2019 in Beaumont, Texas, as a part of a lawsuit that has been filed against him and his P.I. company, Klein Investigations & Consulting, regarding an illegal bounty hunting scheme.
The fact that Philip Klein has been accused of pedophilia should really come as no surprise. After all, he has also been accused of being involved in the very suspicious death of Texas oilman / billionaire William Kallop after Klein was spotted in the Dominican Republic at Kallop’s property on the very day Kallop was struck on the head and died!!
While we would love to show you, our teeming MILLIONS of readers, listeners, and supporters, videos of Philip Klein having sex with animals, even we here at the BV Files libel-blog have some standards. Instead we will show you the video from Klein’s November 20 deposition and you can count for yourselves just how many lies Klein tells while under oath. GUESS CORRECTLY AND YOU CAN WIN A NEW CAR!!
WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? STAY TUNED TO FIND OUT!!
BUT FIRST SOME UPDATES….
For those of you wondering: Yes, former attorney Jason Lee Van Dyke still does have the look of a pedophile. CHECK IT OUT!!
There is more than one way to skin a cat or, in this case, a Nazi / ‘pedoguy’. So while your American Hero & Honorary Admin of the BV Files Tom Retzlaff takes his case involving anti-SLAPP sanctions all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, a motion to dismiss the entire lawsuit has just been filed in the trial court. CHECK IT OUT!!
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***ECF 110 - D's Amended Rule 12(b)(6) mtn to dismiss (no exhibits)
BEAUMONT ATTORNEY JOHN MORGAN GETS HIT WITH MORE SANCTIONS….
On January 8, 2020, drug addict / child abuser John Morgan has been ordered to appear before Visiting Judge Thomas Chambers for a hearing in which Morgan will be getting hit with nearly $100,000 more in additional sanctions for violating the Texas Citizens Participation Act (“TCPA”).
How do we know that this will happen? CHECK IT OUT!!
Which totally sucks for John Morgan…..
But to understand what will be happening later this week, one must look back in time to see what has previously taken place. So let us step into the BV Files time warp.
Back in April 2017, Beaumont, Texas, attorney John Morgan was not happy about Judge Tommy Chambers. So just two hours before a hearing to assess mandatory sanctions against Morgan for filing frivolous litigation in violation of the Texas Citizens Participation Act (“TCPA”) 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!!!
AND HOW DID THE PRESIDING JUDGE RULE ON MORGAN’S CRAZY REQUEST?
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).
JOHN MORGAN IS A CRIMINAL CHILD ABUSER WHO WAS HIRED BY JAMES MCGIBNEY & VIAVIEW TO REPRESENT THEM IN AN ANTI-BULLYING LAWSUIT FILED IN TEXAS. HE WAS FOUND GUILTY OF ABUSING HIS OWN CHILDREN AND PLEAD GUILTY TO MAKING FALSE POLICE REPORTS AGAINST HIS EX-WIFE. HE IS ALSO A DEADBEAT WHO DOES NOT PAY HIS BILLS!
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!
Members of the Dorrell – Retzlaff Death Threats Team include (but are not limited to) the following:
Judge McKeithen does not like drug addicts or retards. And he most especially does not like Bullyville attorney John Morgan, who is both!
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!
Hey McGibney – Has your attorney ever won a case before the US Supreme Court? CHECK IT OUT!!
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.
SO HOW DOES THE TEXAS CITIZENS PARTICIPATION ACT WORK???
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.
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.
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.
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!
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:
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***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 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:
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.
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).
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.
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:
THAT WAS A DIRTY, ROTTEN LIE JOHN MORGAN AND YOU ARE A BAD MAN! A VERY BAD MAN!
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.
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!
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====>
Morgan Opinion 2015 Tex.App. LEXIS 11078
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.
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 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
And how did everything end?
FILED APRIL 28, 2017, 5:15pm CDT
In a last minute attempt to derail the sanctions hearing, Morgan filed yet another one of his nonsense motions, this time demanding his “due process rights.”
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***Morgan's Mtn for His Due Process Right to Conduct Discovery Prior to a Court - no exhibits
D's Resp. to Morgan's Mtn. for His Due Process Right to Conduct Discovery
Morgan's reply to D's objection to discovery
In one of the documents above, Morgan made repeated reference to claims of sexual abuse and nude photos of his daughter, Anne. We would suggest that you read over the claims Morgan makes in his Reply document.
If anyone has nude pictures of her, please feel free to share them with us.
The amount of lies told by Philip Klein in this deposition is shocking.
Klein knows his ship is fast sinking and he could not throw Steve Hartman under the bus fast enough. CHECK IT OUT!!
What does Hartman’s wife, Tara, think of this? Please feel free to ask her yourselves. Here is her Facebook account so you can message her and ask====>
OVER TWO YEARS AGO WE MADE THE FOLLOWING PREDICTION:
Once reality sets in and she and her husband realize how Klein is trying to pin the blame all on Hartman, we suspect that Steve will have a Come to Jesus moment and will contact the attorney for the two girls and confess to everything and lay the blame where it properly belongs in order to save his own skin. Am I right?
For those of you just tuning in: This lawsuit arises from an October 13, 2016, incident in which Hartman, while employed by Klein as a “bounty hunter,” attempted to arrest a passenger in Litisha Peshoff’s vehicle after a terrifying car chase. Klein admits his employee Steve Hartman pursued the women in his unmarked truck for several miles, intentionally displaying his firearm in a threatening manner. At a stoplight, Hartman demanded that Peshoff pull her vehicle off the road. Peshoff—a young mother of five who was en route to pick up her children—ignored Hartman and continued driving.
At the next stoplight, Hartman leaped from his unmarked truck and assumed a threatening stance in front of Peshoff’s vehicle with his gun drawn. Hartman ordered Peshoff to pull off the road into a nearby church parking lot. Peshoff complied. Hartman followed the women into the parking lot and parked so as to block Peshoff from driving her vehicle away.
Local police soon arrived and they took Hartman into custody.
Hartman was later tried and convicted. He is no longer allowed to be a private investigator, process server, or bounty hunter.
Hey, BV Files, where did Klein commit aggravated perjury? you ask. Well the part that the District Attorney’s office is investigating deals with the email from Lisa Martin at Al Reed Bail Bonds instructing Hartman to go arrest Gidget Jackowski (a lady who had a warrant), along with Klein’s claim that Hartman was “moonlighting” or otherwise working on his own. Philip Klein says in his deposition that he checked Hartman’s company email account and found no such email. But both Hartman and Ms. Martin state that there was an email – and said email was produced at the deposition!!
In Texas, aggravated perjury is telling a lie that is material to the case or matter being decided.
In any event, here are some excerpts from the depositions of Philip Klein, Steve Hartman, and Lisa Martin (the office manager for Al Reed Bail Bonds) so that you can follow along at home.
THIS IS WHAT KLEIN HAD TO SAY:
THIS IS WHAT LISA MARTIN OF AL REED BAIL BONDS HAD TO SAY:
AND THIS IS WHAT STEVE HARTMAN HAD TO SAY:
As many of you, our teeming MILLIONS of readers, listeners, and supporters will recall, the attorney for James McGibney (who we don’t like) is facing a disbarment trial in Florida as a result of a complaint filed by your American Hero & Honorary Admin of the BV Files Thomas Retzlaff. Retzlaff appeared and testified during a hearing in May 2019. A new hearing was conducted yesterday, January 8, 2020, in Tallahassee, Florida.
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***
In re Marc Randazza - Case SC19-0188 - LETTER TO JUDGE
As many of you, our teeming MILLIONS of readers, listeners, and supporters will recall, several months ago we informed you that a judge from Dallas County had been selected to oversee the disbarment trial against Nazi / ‘pedo guy’ Jason Lee Van Dyke. Well today we have the official announcement from the Texas Supreme Court appointing the Honorable Dennise Garcia of the 308th District Court of Dallas County, Texas, to preside over this trial. CHECK IT OUT!!
FUN FACTS: Garcia received her undergraduate degree and J.D. from Southern Methodist University.
- 2004-Present: Judge, 303rd District Court
- 2003-2004: Attorney, K. Dennise Garcia, P. C.
- 1995-2003: Attorney, Goranson, Bain & Larsen, L.C.
- 1993-1995: Attorney, Ron Massingill, P.C
- 2007: SMU Women’s Symposium, Profiles in Leadership Award
- 2006: Merrill Hartman Judicial Pro Bono Service Award
- 2003-2004: Texas Super Lawyer in Texas Monthly and Law and Politics Magazine
- 2001: College of the State Bar of Texas: Best CLE article, “Speaking in Codes” (co-author)
- 1990: SMU “M” Award
For some reason, we here at the BV Files feel that Judge Garcia will be less than impressed with Van Dyke once she has a chance to read over his social media posts and arrest records (which just hit her InBox in three….two…..one……..)
More updates will be posted later this week and things progress!
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.