For God's sake people, my ownership of this blog has never been a secret. Those of you who ACTUALLY know me, know that I do not readily have the time to "sit" on this blog. I have a business, a new daughter, home renovations, community involvement, etc ...
If this blog is so unpopular than why have a vast array of similar blogs e-blossomed? They have actually capitalized on the name through their highly intelligent creativity (same name different blog company, or by the spelling of Antics with an "x"). Why? No original thought process ... "Beam me up Scotty" ... I did not know that Alexandria had so many parrots.
Jacques, good luck my friend, it's a hard battle to fight but fight the good fight ... there are individuals within this community who think for themselves, do what they can for the community and now matter how much unfiltered horse manure is spread, are still able to grow healthy and useful "seedlings" not weeds.
Respectfully,
Quint Carriere
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1,702 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 1601 – 1702 of 1702Spanky...one more thing you may have overlooked, as detailed in the article...Mr. Aymond wants 5-plus year's of all of Dupree's emails..composed and received. So "your judgement" of what Dupree does with his time might have been a little presumptive and not realistic.
Rebuttal to Faircloth's Town Talk Letter
I have sent to following rebuttal to Pineville City Attorney,
Jimmy Faircloth's, letter, which appeared in the January 25, 2007
Opinion section of the Alexandria Daily Towntalk:
Unfortunately, I feel compelled to respond to Jimmy Faircloth's
comments of January 25, 2007. Although Mr. Faircloth's statements
are filled with innacuracies, fortunately, however, Judge Swent will
decide the issues based upon law and evidence.
Louisiana's Constitution and statutes recognize a fundamental
right of its citizens to access public records. In fact, the public
body is prohibited by law from even asking why those records are
being sought. The Public Records law contains many exceptions, to
protect privacy, but requires the public body to specifically state
which exceptions apply to prohibit release of the records within a
few days of the request.
The request was for Mr. Dupree's e-mails, on his City e-mail
account and on City computers. My initital request also contained a
question to Pineville of if those emails could be cheaply downloaded
to computer disk. Within the time allowed by law, Pineville failed
to state why the emails would not be provided, failed to answer the
question of downloading, and simply asked me to limit or narrow the
scope of my request. Absolutely no mention of costs was initially
mentioned by Pineville. Our law is clear that there is no limit to
the number of or amount of Public Record requests. Several months
after the time to provide those records, the City of Pineville filed
suit to not only seek their costs for lawyers looking through the e-
mails, but to also limit the size of my request.
Persuant to law, I, in turn, requested the court to review those
e-mails and decide what is public or not. All Pinville has to do is
download those e-mails to a disk and give to Judge Swent to review.
That will take just a few minutes for Pineville to do. I have
offered to supply the computer disks. Pineville has admitted that it
has not even looked at the e-mails to determine which are public and
which are not. Judge Swent will decide on February 5th whether or
not she will review those e-mails.
Judge Swent has also, in a lawsuit I am handling concerning the
destruction of my client's property due to a defective sewer line,
forced Pineville to comply with subpoenas they refused. Clearly,
the City of Pineville exhibits a history of not wanting many of
their actions exposed to public scrutiny. As to Dupree's e-mails, I
am looking for corroboration of possible wrondoing that I have
received of.
Mr. Faircloth was also incorrect of the grounds for the dismissal
of my lawsuit against Dupree. That suit was not dismissed for any
immunity, and one of three court of appeal judges wrote that the
dismissal of that suit without my being allowed to present testimony
or evidence was wrong. Also Mr. Faircloth failed to mention that an
ethics complaint against a Police Juryman and a Bar complaint
against me, after the Police Jury removed Dupree from the water
Board, were dismissed as being baseless.
As with all litigations, there are two or more conflicting
sides. That is why we have courts of law to decide.
Gregory R. Aymond
Attorney at Law
What if I am just Joe Six Pack and I do not have money to hire lawyers is this the City of Pinevilles way of keeping people like me from even asking for information about his governement? I am insulted by the editorial this morning as I was yesterday when I read the arrogant ramblings of Mr Faircloth. The responses written earlier this morning were clearly from people who are either Rich Dupree himself or someone "in the know' at the City of Pineville. Shame on all of them . They may have forgotten but this is OUR COUNTRY and OUR CITY and not some temporary custodians of the office. The Judge should make them give the information requested AND apologize for this waste of taxpayer money. I do not give one care in the world about Aymond , Faircloth or Dupree but I DO care about the rights of ANY person who wants to exersize that right for open disclosure. What arrogance these people have. And what an embarrassment to them all. If the Judge denies Mr Aymonds request I intend myself to get others to make similar requests till we get every single solitary document that these Philistines have and to post them right here. This is America how dare they!
The Town Talk, KALB and every other news organization ought to join in supporting enforcement of the open records law and make our servants aware of just who really owns the city . The citizens. I agree with the comment in the paper, it seems like they are trying to hide something.
Hiding behind the costs of producing an email? Are their nuclear secrets or issues of National Security contained in this important persons computer? Geeeee. Its PINEVILLE...not Washington DC. They either have an embellished opinion of themselves or they have something very damaging that they are trying to hide. But using a costs defense is a joke. Have they ever done this on any other requests for records or is this the only requests that have ever received. Seems like all they are doing is trying discourage other citizens from asking questions. Is not a right we have?
The example I posted was illustrative and not judgemental as I left that to those with basic reasonong ability to come to their own conclusions after posing the simple question of Mr. Dupree's time usage and his ability to produce such a volume of e-mail while conducting his other daily duties. Think about it.
Very interesting. I wonder if Faircloth and gang can spell B-A-C-K-L-A-S-H and R-E-P-E-R-C-U-S-S-I-O-N??
I think such arrogant publication of their opposition to a citizens request regardless of who he is will bring more interest and more people into this debate. I as a citizen am not harmed by the city disclosing documents that they are supposed to disclose . I am harmed if they refuse to. What are they hiding?
I wonder if Faircloth charged the City of Dupree for writing that dribble in the paper? Why on Earth would the Mayor of Pineville let his attorney even comment to the paper on an ongoing case and then to write this so called editorial and thus expand this debate such as to draw even more people into it? Big big big mistake. I agree with previous blogger. Either their ego is to big or they are hiding something damaging.
Can we get a copy of the Faircloth legal bills without having to file suit? How do I go about making a request and what will it cost me?
If I ask for that is someone from the City going to talk bad about me in the newspaper?
Based upon the City of Pinevilles response Yes, I think they might write something bad about you or sue you like they evidently did to this Aymond fellow.
"I can’t imagine that Hilton’s endorsement could amount to much..."
Yeah, ask Rick Farrar about that.....ha.
That could be more about RICK and Less about the Hilton
This proves that many folks on here are issue oriented. Aymond's cause has produced a ground swell of support from us commoners. Nice to see.
Spanky, the 10,000 plus e-mails account for 5 years worth, not two..
Additionally, Aymond requested not only the e-mails Dupree COMPOSED but also the e-mails he RECEIVED.
Amybody see a pattern here?
1) Aymond is a proven liar and cannot be trusted.
2) Faircloth is a well respected, honest attorney who has NEVER had any trouble with the bar.
3)Faircloth said Aymond can have all the e-mails he wants, as long as he posts a bond to pay for the cost of reproduction, something allowed in Louisiana Law.
4) Aymond is broke and cannot afford to pay the costs associated with getting him the e-mails.
5)Aymond has a vendetta against Dupree. He has publicly stated that he wants to get Dupree at all costs.
6)Even now, with all the public attention, Aymond is getting just what he wants...attention for himself and causing trouble for Dupree.
7)Notice how all the Anon posts are pro Aymond? Aymond is well known for posting as anon...he's been caught at it many times.
8) Bottom like is that Aymond has been offered the e-mails he wants as long as he pays for them. He continues to refuse and make a big stink about this because he thinks it makes Dupree look bad.
#1=opinion, #2=opinion #3- Is a $25,000 bond reasonable and applicable to everyone else? #4 are you his accountant or has his accountant violated client privelage by divulging this information to you? #5 - Is Greg Mafioso? How does requesting public information make his actions personal revenge? #6 is your judgement and assertion, depending on your credibility, suspect. #7 - Anonymous, you don't sound pro-Aymond. #8 - At exorbitant and arbitrary cost.
Are you a professional Swiss Cheese manufacturer?
If you gotta have $30K to get some info out of Pineville, that counts me, and I'll bet you, out.
copied from "we saw that"
the cenla antics so called blog must be a unit of the local republican political action committee called cenla gopac inc. heres why:
the self admitted owner of the blog is one samuel "quint" carriere v. mr. carriere is named in louisiana sec'y of state filings as the director of the cenla gopac inc. its registered office address is:
6205 bradford drive, alexandria, la 71303. the mailing address is: post office box 12445 alexandria, la 71303.
the problem with cenla gopac is that they are even more (as if thats possible) incompetent than the national republican party. instead of being a blog to get their message out -- cenla antics rapidly morphed into the kind of blog thats full of gossip, venom, hate mongering, put downs and it promotes community divisiveness -- come to think of it perhaps that was their plan all along. how else does one explain comments such as these being allowed and apparently even encouraged:
Anonymous said...
Lamar's just a nigger loving crippled asshole with absolutely no experience. He's a blueblood who has had everything handed to him and probably graduated at the top of his class at Rice because his teachers felt sorry for him.
Sunday, January 21, 2007 8:37:40 PM
====
Anonymous said...
Crippled people aren't real people.
Sunday, January 21, 2007 8:35:26 PM
====
screen grab here.
the cenlagopac inc., website links to cenla antics blog and cenla antics blog links back to cenlagopac.org
according to their website here is the most recent list of officers:
* Wayne Ryan, Chairman
* Larry Jeane, Vice Chairman
* Garland Lawrence, Secretary
* Chuck Tosten, Treasurer
* Quint Carriere, Fundraising Chairman
* Peter Moriarty, Precinct Chairman
* Blake Cooper, Candidate Recruitment
* Gena Gore, Community Outreach Director
* Dallas Hixson, Volunteer Enlistment Chairman
wayne ryan
wayne edward ryan is a louisiana licensed (la lic no. 161888) insurance agent. amongst the lines mr. ryan represents are: american public life insurance company, hmo of louisiana, inc., boston mutual life insurance company and eleven more.
larry jeane
larry jeane is the elected city marshall of wards 9,10&11 rapides parish, louisiana. the question we have to ask is do we really want our elected officials to be associated with organizations such as cenla gopac inc. and cenla antics? the answer is of course no. marshall jeane should place himself on the pineville most wanted list. barring that, marshall jeane as an elected official for all the citizens of wards 9,10&11 needs to come out and publicly renounce cenla antics and cenla gopac, inc.and disassociate himself from both or resign his office of public trust.
garland lawrence
garland lawrence is a retired business executive with cleco hmm and after we took up for cleco in our cleco is being shafted post. looks like mr. lawrence found a new life in the consulting biz (dont they all?) see lawrence & associates consultants inc uh oh looks like he has a hand in the cleco retirees inc
chuck tosten
chuck tosten is a retired air force pilot. hmm mr. tosten must be the air force's equivalent of the united states navy's republican senator john mccain. mccain is of course the biggest phony in america.
quint carriere a/k/a samuel "quint" carriere, v
supposedly mr. carriere owns a local greasy spoon err coffee shop franchise called pj's coffee of new orleans, 4501 jackson street extension, suite f, alexandria, la we havent been able to locate what name or company this business is in. looks like we will have to make a trip to the rapides parish sales and use tax office to get a copy of its business license. mr. carriere together with his wife isabel v. carriere are owners of a corporation called venture funding, llc.
ms. carriere, is also the vice president and treasurer of red river bancshares, inc., you might know it better as red river bank. ms. carriere is also a manager of rivermark properties llc., the registered agent of rivermark is one robert g. nida of the scandalous gold-weems law firm. why do we say the scandalous gold law firm?...well, ask the (at last count twenty plus) members of the ogden middleton victims net about the kind of legal ethics the gold firm practices.
peter moriarty
peter moriarty is the president of rapides symphony orchestra and if cenla antics and cenla gopac are any indication of the type of music mr. moriarity makes we'll take a pass.
blake cooper
sketchy
gena gore
a/k/a legena gore
a/k/a "scarlett" on cenla antics
gena gore is a principal of alpine lawn & landscape llc [website]and t & g trees llc
"scarlett" also made this recent comment on cenla antics:
Scarlett said...
Quint - I'm not thanking you for your identity. I already knew it and have never thought it necessary that everyone know who you are in order to enjoy the blog. I do thank you for the blog and for being the constant strong willed person that you are.
Monday, December 18, 2006 5:45:43 PM
dallas hixson
dallas hixson is a member of an old patrician family who made their fortune off of death and misery see hixson brothers funeral homes and looks like now they have branched out into the automobile bidness see hixson autoplex of alexandria, inc. its always good to have some charity involvement on your resume so mr. hixson is the director of the alexandria jaycees. having a massive family fortune is hell so he's the registered agent of the hixson family investment company, llc and hixson management, inc to keep track of it all. an anonymous email wrote to remind us of mr. hixsons' familys' cushy government contracts for cars (especially cop cars). oh horrors this just in via drudge: "ford posts worst loss in its history."
now then, is this really the kind of people that you want to be associated with? is this the sort of characters you want knowing your personal business? why should we trust anyone that this cadre puts forth to be an elected official? the answer is obvious we shouldnt. in fact, doing business with this lot is about the same as giving a robber who's entering your home the very gun to use against you.
where might we ask is our local media at? why isnt news channel 5 "with cameras rolling" camped out at p.j.s coffee shop or at this groups headquarters? why isnt the town talk exposing just what is going on here in cenla with the local republican party? why arent they finding out what gives these local republicans the right to post and publish such a hate filled, community divisive bunch of rubbish?
could be the answer be because these people are all advertisers in the local media?
and where is the local black leadership? where is the "good morning, good morning, good morning" preacher at? why isnt he demanding answers from the local republicans for their promotion of bigotry, hate and the vilest of name calling?
even more importantly, why isnt the national republican party, louisiana's republican party and all the similar local republican pac's and republicans of good conscience (as if!) repudiating cenla gopac? to borrow a line from joseph welch which seems fitting here; to all republicans we ask: "Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?"
today the town talk even goes so far as to publish an editorial titled: "our view: embarrassed of louisiana? you should be." of course the town talk can only write a generic article. notice how the town talk never names names or gives any examples of what or who is behind their view of the so called corruption? this was noted by several of their story chat commentors as well.
the town talk reminds us of that part in chris rock"s 1996 "bring the pain" stand-up comedy presentation where mr. rock is talking about how "niggers" will break into your house and steal your t.v. etc then when you call the police and the police are interviewing your neighbors none of them heard or saw anything -- mr. rock says with a flourish "you dont know shit cos you was doing shit" and that describes the town talk (as well as the rest of the local media) to a T.
heres how we imagine a meeting goes at the cenla gopac headquarters:
gopacker: "hey did you hear about john deaux?"
gopacker2: "i read on our tee hee blog, that deaux and his family are having a few problems why?'"
banker gopacker: "well as we all know the deaux family does all their banking with us and there has been some trouble with their accounts, their checking account is overdrawn a lot and i noticed on the credit card account that we issued them that there has been a lot of charges for internet porn sites and several large cash advances at the casino..."
insurance agent gopacker: [see here or here] "well, you know i handle all of their insurance needs and i did some checking at the medical information bureau and turns out the wife has been in treatment twice for drugs and alcohol addiction, the daughter has had an abortion, the son has aids and ol john is being treated for manic depression and other disorders..."
banker gopacker: "i wasnt going to mention this so soon but you know the deaux's have been in default on their mortage with our bank and they own some choicy real estate, well our lawyer and our judges and friends in the courthouse almost has everything drawn up and in place so that we can swoop in and take it over. it will make a nice addition to our properties portfolio..."
car dealer gopacker: "you want to hear something funny last week the deaux's came in to deal on a new truck and every credit company we applied to turned them down flat. hell, even kip kipper's old company reliable finance wouldnt touch em."
pest control company gopacker: "my guys tell me that deaux house is full of fleas and roachs...."
head gopacker: raising his glass to offer a toast..."you know the deaux's notwithstanding, since we started this gop thing i think we can all agree that we've all really seen a spike in our respective businesses, plus we can watch and track nearly everyone in central louisiana especially our members and whoever said there is a sucker born every minute must have been from central louisiana"
all the gopackers: clinking their glasses together "here! here! muahahaha"
this isnt about stifling free-speech its about having something that all the citizens of cenla can be proud of. instead of tearing the community down why not have something where people can go and anonymously or whatever chat and debate about real issues? who in their right mind would recommend cenla antics to anyone?
heres what chad rodgers editor and publisher of the dead pelican website said about cenla antics:
"I can't believe anybody stays on it for longer than five seconds before saying "to hell with this." [...] With Republican operatives like that, no wonder we are a Democratic state."
Three cheers for 'we saw that'. Keep the heat on the Republican Party, they (I am one, too) should ot tolerate the kind of hate mongering that goes on here.
The math still breaks down to .83 e-mails per hour, sent or delivered, use your judgment to gauge the veracity of Faircloths's statement.
I find it amazing how much a person assumes about other's character when it is obvious to those of us who know and will take the liberty of displaying their ignorance and pettiness with unabashed glee.
Spanky, not to burst your bubble, but I work for a local utility company and my mailbox has 10 to 15, non-spam e-mails in it every morning when I get in. About half of there require some sort of reply.
My wife is a paralegal at one of the larger law firms in Alexandria...she says the has double that every day.
I think it's entirely reasonable that the second in command of Pineville has a total of at lease 10 e-mails a day combined.
Then it makes me wonder if Dupree has destroyed some of the emails already. Does anyone on here know what the law is regardling preserving public records? How wan any of us know that the emails turned over has not been sanitized. Aymond, if you are listening, how can you make sure that they comply with the request completely and not delete any emails that might be troublesome, if they even exist? How can you be sure they fully comply?
For one of the experts on here. What exactly does the public records law require that our government make available to us to see? And are there any exceptions or exclusions or can we read everything. What if I can not afford to pay for all the money that the atty says Aymond has to pay , does that mean that rich people have greater rights then not so rich people like me?
The article yesterday said that Pineville was objecting not only to Aymond getting the emails but also objecting to even the Judge seeing the emails? Did i read that right? Are they crazy?
So Fields and Dupree do not even want a Judge to review the emails in private. That speaks volumes. I say print them here. This is the same hypocrit who tells everyone he runs such an "open' administration. Right. It sure shows. I do not even live in Pineville, but if I did I would be outraged.
And then they attack Billy Gunn for defending the Public records law. Unbelievable. Good thing Gunn didnt write an article on Free Speech or Freedom of the Press they might have linched him. It seems just this simple. If the City has emails that they do not want to let a Citizen look at there are 3 things they can do. They can 1) delete them. (who knows maybe they have) they can 2) just say NO ( sounds like that is what they have done since Oct ) or they can 3) make the request cost prohibitive such that no one can reasonably afford to get the emails. (THAT is what they are doing now) And if what they say officially is true and that is that Aymond can have the emails but it will cost to determine which ones he can have under law THEN they should be welcoming the Judges willingness to read them.
Can anyone explain what might be in those emails that they would want hidden? Can anyone explain why they would not want a Judge to review them? Is this an open administration?
I know it is not the same by any means but humans share common characteristics. Does anyone on here remember how hard the White House fought to keep anyone from seeing documents or hearing tapes. EVEN the JUDGES or Courts. Am I the only 60 year old on this sight today?
Excellent defense of We Saw That. You should not be so bashful - tell us who(m) you are so that we can readily identify you with that great american. There is an association that you should be proud of and public about. So, what was your name again.
We Saw That has proven himself to be just what he is railing about. Has he totally lost his mind? I don't believe for one minute that GoPac members are the one's posting all of the scurrilous attacks on this blog. What total nonsense. Lot's of free press though.
I did not really know about or care about this stuff going on across the river, but thanks to the article yesterday and particularly the letter to the editor today I want to know exactly what is in those hidden emails. This was the topic of discussion at the donut shop this morning and it was pretty much everyones opinion. The bible says that "The truth shall set you free" I hope that your Mayor will remember that instead of withholding the truth on these government documents.
Has a city ever sued someone for asking for records before? Seriously. If I send them a letter asking for something is the City of Pineville going to sue me? Damn, this sounds like Russia
You bunch of dimwits! Ya'll really don't get it.
IT'S NOT ABOUT THE E-MAILS OR THEIR CONTENT!
This is about allowing a citizen to use the law to conduct a personal smear campaign against a public official.
Proving once again the old adage that birds of a feather...We Saw That and Aymond seem to have a mutual admiriration blog site love fest going.
No, you didn't read the article right. The City of Pineville is NOT opposed to the Judge reviewing City of Pineville emails. According to the article, they are opposed to the Judge doing at no cost to Mr. Aymond, who made the broad request in the first place. The point is that Mr. Aymond wants the citizens to pay for his wrath against Dupree and hopes the Judge will help him out.
Visiting he We Hate That site is like a space walk. It links you up with every cybernut in the universe. I find comfort in the knowledge that these nutz have to display their madness. If this geek was hiding under a rock somewhere he would present a potential danger. Fortunately, he is filled with more hate than he can contain.
It is unfair to associate Aymond with this spook.
If the emails contain nothing to harm someone with then how would requesting them achieve any type of attack on that person?
Is there some provision of the law that allows the city to determine the motive or spirit of the person who requests the information? And if so what is to prevent a corrupt government to question the motive of everyone who asks for disclosure of information. What if Nixon had said 'these Democrats hate me they want to get me, therefore I do not have to give over the tapes"..OH thats right , thats kind of what he did say didnt he.
IF There is nothing to hide , what better way to shut up ole fatty than to simply turn them over. Especially if the law says they have to.
Look, it was more the coverup than the break in that got Nixon. Is that what we have here? Its NOT their property , its the peoples property. Give it up.
"Allowing a citizen to use the law . . . ."
What's wrong with that? Isn't that the way its suppose to happen. Aymond is willing to play by the rules and Pineville isn't. Judge Swent ain't gonna be happy about some lawyer in pending litigation taking the show biz route instead of addressing it in her courtroom. It's an obvious attempt to embarrass the judge into do it there way. She don't play that way.
The City of Pineville is NOT opposed to the Judge reviewing City of Pineville emails.
Thats not what Pineville said in their lawsuit. The entire thing is on We Saw That sight. Pineville also wants Aymond to limit the scope of his request. Aymond responded saying the law does not make him limit the request. Also, if the law says that the judge can review the e-mails, how is Aymond getting something for free? Doesn't he have to pay court costs like anyone who uses the courts? Isn't it Pineville who sued him and brought him to court? Now in court it seems that Pineville doesn't want to play by its rules.
Shame on you Mayor Fields.
My, my, my…the blog is really active today. Please excuse the length of the following post fellow bloggers, but it is necessary to truthfully explain the Pineville E-mail situation.
According to my copy of civil suit #226484, the City of Pineville is suing Mr. Aymond in an attempt to have Mr. Aymond pay for the cost of producing the e-mails.
Apparently the sequence of events, some very poor reporting by the TT, and the spin from the Aymond camp have created a false impression as to what has transpired. Mr. Aymond made a request of the City of Pineville for five years worth of e-mail records on only one employee, Mr. Dupree. Since all these e-mails resided in one file, and some of these e-mails were not subject to Title 44 surrender, it became necessary to separate the e-mails. Determining which e-mails were public and which were not, is a task for a trained legal mind and could take weeks, if not months, to accomplish. If the City was to follow the law, and separate the e-mails, the City would incur considerable taxpayer expense. Under law, the City would be able to recover these expenses from Mr. Aymond. The City informed Mr. Aymond that they would be happy to proceed and deliver the separated e-mails, providing Mr. Aymond post a reasonable bond to insure payment of the expense of complying with his request. This is very common in Public Record Requests and allowed by Title 44.
Mr. Aymond refused to post the bond and has refused to ask for specific types of e-mails which would reduce the cost. He maintains that every e-mail is necessary for his investigation, and wants every e-mail dating back 5 years.
The City has sued Mr. Aymond, saying that his refusal to pay the separation costs, in effect, prevent the City from discharging their legal responsibilities under Title 44.
Mr. Aymond has filed an answer to the suit, asking Judge Swent to conduct an “in camera” review of 10,000 plus e-mails, which in effect transfers the cost of the file separation and review from Pineville to the 9th JDC. A hearing is scheduled in February where Judge Swent will decide if she wishes to take on the burden of separating the e-mails. If she does not, Aymond will be forced to post the bond that Pineville originally requested, and he will get the e-mails.
In any event, Pineville has not refused to produce the e-mails, at all. They just don’t want the taxpayers charged with huge document search and legal fees. Should Judge Swent decide to incur this cost, I assume Pineville will gladly allow her to do so.
Survey says…this conflict is much to do about nothing. Pineville has not refused anyone access to any records. They are protecting the taxpayer interests in refusing to pay the costs for an attorney to separate the e-mails. At an average cost of $75.00 per hour for an attorney to review 10,000 documents, the cost could be very large indeed.
It is a matter of law that the person making the request must pay the costs of fulfilling the request. Mr. Aymond should be required to follow the law.
The feathers and bones have spoken
And Soothsayer..you would know all this inside this information first hand how?????.. Pretty clear where your bread is buttered.
Soothsayer, if your analysis is correct a poor man would never have access to public records would they.
They are protecting the taxpayer interests in refusing to pay the costs for an attorney to separate the e-mails.
Go back to your buddies in Pineville Sooth and stop tyring to mislead people. If Judge Swent sorts them out, no attorney is needed by Pineville. The law provides copy fees, court costs determines what Judge Swent's costs will be.
We taxpayers have already paid for courts to decide disputes. Who are they fooling, Pineville simply doesn't want the emails seen.
- Soothsayer, if your analysis is correct a poor man would never have access to public records would they.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. Most records requests are narrowly focused and requiring copying a realtively small amount of info. Mr. Aymond is conducting recon by fire. He doesn't know if there is anything but if he fires a few shots he might stir them up.
Pineville is right to stick to its guns; Mr. Aymond is abusing the system and spirit of the law.
I'll bet Pineville is already out some major bucks, not to mention the black eye. It's a chess game and Aymond is winning. I like to see the little guy (so to speak) win once in a while.
To---> January 25, 2007 7:41:16 PM
OMG you are such an idiot!
Sooth said: "which in effect transfers the cost of the file separation and review from Pineville to the 9th JDC."
#1 EVERYBODY who read this can see that Pineville will not have to pay some attorney to separate the e-mails if Swent does it.
This is exactally what BOTH parties want! Somebody, anybody! to pay the cost of separating the e-mails!
Gezzzez, what a dumbass.
LSA-R.S. 44:32 - The custodian may establish and
collect reasonable fees for making copies of public records. Copies of
records may be furnished without charge or at a reduced charge to
indigent citizens of this state.
LSA-R.S. 44:4.1 - The legislature recognizes that it is essential to the operation of
a democratic government that the people be made aware of all exceptions,
exemptions, and limitations to the laws pertaining to public records. In
order to foster the people's awareness, the legislature declares that all
exceptions, exemptions, and limitations to the laws pertaining to public
records shall be provided for in this Chapter or the Constitution of
Louisiana. Any exception, exemption, and limitation to the laws
pertaining to public records not provided for in this Chapter or in the
Constitution of Louisiana shall have no effect.
LSA-R.S. 44:22- Economic Development exclisions to public records only apply to the Louisiana Department of Economic Development, not a city.
LSA-R.S. 44:35 - The court may view the documents in controversy in camera before
reaching a decision.
44:33. Availability of records
A.(1) When a request is made for a public record to which the public is
entitled, the official, clerks of court and the custodian of notarial
records in and for the parish of Orleans excepted, who has responsibility
for the record shall have the record segregated from other records under
his custody so that the public can reasonably view the record.
LSA-R.S. 44:32(3) No fee shall be charged to any person to examine or review any
public records, except as provided in this Section, and no fee shall be
charged for examination or review to determine if a record is subject to
disclosure, except as may be determined by a court of competent
jurisdiction.
LSA-R.S.44:32 - A. The custodian shall present any public record to any person of the
age of majority who so requests. The custodian shall make no inquiry of
any person who applies for a public record...
44:35. Enforcement
A. Any person who has been denied the right to inspect or copy a record
under the provisions of this Chapter, either by a final determination of
the custodian or by the passage of five days, exclusive of Saturdays,
Sundays, and legal public holidays, from the date of his request without
receiving a final determination in writing by the custodian, may
institute proceedings for the issuance of a writ of mandamus, injunctive
or declaratory relief, together with attorney's fees, costs and damages
as provided for by this Section, in the district court for the parish in
which the office of the custodian is located.
The record request was was not responded to, and no mention of payment till apprximately one moth later.
The above is the law according to the Louisiana Legislature, not Faircloth or Soothsyaer.
Been busy tonight tubby???? I guess you have! making all these posts as anonymous so you can cover your ass, takes time huh?
Just so everybody else will know:
LA RS 44:23C.(1)(a) For all public records, except public records of state agencies, it shall be the duty of the custodian of such public records to provide copies to persons so requesting. The custodian may establish and collect reasonable fees for making copies of public records.
Hey Tubby!...Sooth slamed ya pretty good by just telling the truth. Now we know you can't afford to pay for the stuff you ask for.
If anybody wants to read title 44 they can find it here:
http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/
tsrssearch.htm
February 5th - Judge Rae Swents courtroom - be there or be square.
Ahhhh I see the small minds have weighed in on my previous posts. One asked where I got my information from. I answer you thus: From READING my copy of the lawsuit in question, and from consulting my attorney, who has handled my legal affairs for more than 25 years.
Another asked if a poor man could ever have access to public records. That sir should be addressed by the Louisiana Legislature. It is they who made provisions for charging the public to have copies of public records, not me.
And to the poor soul with dyslexia, please have someone read to you so you will not embarrass yourself in public again. I clearly stated that, according to Attorney Faircloth, who is the official spokesman for Pineville in this matter, and the lawsuit itself, Pineville has not refused anyone access to any records. Choose to believe what you will. If you wish to live in a fantasyland of your own making so be it. However, the facts, truth, and reality of this case display your error.
I have no dog in this fight fellow bloggers and could care less about the outcome. I do seek the truth, and post my findings here.
Survey says: A wise man considers the facts when seeking the truth. No doubt Aymond has a long history of attacks on Dupree and has publicly stated he will go to any lengths to distroy him.
Jimmy Faircloth, on the other hand, had an flawless reputation as an honorable and truthfull man. I believe honor and truth over hate and revenge every time.
The feathers and bones have spoken
Is Soothsayer Dallas Hixon of the GOPAK gang?
Ya'll pet the dog and he was here all day posting. At least it gave Lamar a break.
Most of todays entries were a failure to communicate. In order to comprehend one must read and understand. Today there were many who read but were unable to comprehend. Sooth, thanks for the concise explaination. Deacon
Just because Sooth can read, make an intelligent decision, and reach a conclusion based on fact...you automatically assume he's a Republican? Good come back class.
One missed point is that any one of us may REVIEW at no cost. I am sure that compliance with the law would have allowed Mr. Aymond to then gladly pay for copies (which is provided for under the law) of any pertinent e-mails at a more reasonable cost than what is proposed. I must respectfully disagree with Sooth in his statement that there has been no refusal to turn over records. They have three days to comply and to date have not, hence a refusal to comply with the law. While there are many and specific exemptions for disclosure, the City of Pineville has not put forth any specific exemption allowed under the law.
And this is not someone trying to go into a private entity and look at their secrets - this is the public domain, a city government which is supported and owned by the public. Spanky's observation is entirely correct and Sooth suffers from lack of insight. I repeat, if the considerations were economic, why would they invest so many public dollars in resisting. Let him look. Then fight about the costs of copies. The reproduction costs are not meant to be an obstacle. $3 a page - must be a hellova copier.
All of his delay is unprecedented. I bet that if the Town Talk or KALB asked for this information they would not get as much trouble.
Maybe some of us should request emails from others at the City and see if we get the same kind of jerking around.
As someone who goes to council meetings, it was refreshing to see somebody question in the paper Gunn's reporting, how he slants stories by leaving out important details so stories better fit his view. And to Dupree and Aymond, we could raise enough money to pay for a review of the e-mails if we could sell tickets to watch a caged match between you two in the parking lot of the old Pineville Walmart. The first one to break the others fingers so they can no longer type and pollute blogs with blather would be the winner.
"Jimmy Faircloth, on the other hand, had an flawless reputation as an honorable and truthfull man."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
You really DON'T know what you are talking about, do ya????
It appears that the City of Pineville has responded to Aymond's request. Pineville apparently asked Aymond to be more specific in order to determine what is Public Record and what is not relative to Aymond's request.
One can make the argument that a public employee should not be receiving personal e-mails so one cannot take a position that the files have to be reviewed to seperate personal e-mails from business.
However what if there are e-mails relative to employees, routine business unrelated to Aymond's search for the truth, simple forms, etc.
Aymond should be allowed to sit at a computer and review, at no charge, those documents relative to his goal. He should not be allowed to, at taxpayer's expense, obtain a copy of anything and everything that has crossed a computer during Dupree's period of employment.
Aymond is on a fishing expedition hoping to find something in all the records that he can file another legal proceddings against Dupree.
Aymond desires the txpayer to finance his fishing expedition.
If Aymond wants the documents and there are 10,000.00 documents bring the City of Pineville a Certified Check for $30,000.00 and then bitch when nothing happens. The law provides for this fee and Aymond being a Lawyer should desire to uphold the Laws of the Land.
The bottom line is Aymond hates Dupree but Aymond wants the taxpayers to fund his fight.
I was not pro Dupree prior to Aymond's continued spinning of the truth, traveling as anoymous on this blog, posting of only portions of the applicable statute, etc.
I strongly suggest we start a Dupree legal fund at a local bank in order that Aymond may be put down at no cost to the taxpayer, the City of Pineville or Dupree.
He should not be allowed to, at taxpayer's expense, obtain a copy of anything and everything that has crossed a computer during Dupree's period of employment.
Aymond says he offered to supply the disks to have them dowloaded to. Why is an employee standing at a copy machine needed?
"I was not pro Dupree prior to Aymond's continued spinning of the truth, traveling as anoymous on this blog, posting of only portions of the applicable statute, etc."
Nice try, Nathan....
Swent, being a Judge, should be knowledgeable of Law and should be able to discern Aymond's movtie. I would think she should/would question Mr. Aymond, under oath, as to his purpose, his topic, etc. If he is merly utilizing the Judicial system and the Freedom of Information Act to further his personal vendetta he should be censored and disbarred.
"Anonymous said...
Is Soothsayer Dallas Hixon of the GOPAK gang?"
Thursday, January 25, 2007 9:41:16 PM
I doubt it. Soothsayer's posts seem to be composed by an intelligent writer. Sooth doesn't strike me as a snake oil salesman.
For those in love with "the law" should note that the purpose for a public record request may not be questioned. I would like to know how a motive for the request has been formulated unless there has been a violation of the law that prevents questioning purpose. Pineville's argument is full of holes and will be fully aired. Has anyone given thought to the fact that our news media has run up against this type of stonewalling on a daily basis and prevented from providing the public the information they need to monitor their government? Maybe someone from the TT of KALB or any other local media can contribute to the discussion as to their personal experience with information requests.
"Anonymous said...
Is Soothsayer Dallas Hixon of the GOPAK gang?"
Uh.......no. Hixon would attach several photos of himself and sign his name to his post.
Swent, being a Judge, should be knowledgeable of Law and should be able to discern Aymond's movtie. I would think she should/would question Mr. Aymond, under oath, as to his purpose, his topic, etc. If he is merly utilizing the Judicial system and the Freedom of Information Act to further his personal vendetta he should be censored and disbarred.
Try reading the law before you make such an ill informed post next time. First, the dispute is under the Louisiana Public Records law, not the federal freedom of information act. Next, if you actually read the right law, someone's motive has absolutely nothing to do with requesting public records. I bet almost all public records requests are to see what is going on inside government. Or perhaps you prefer a dictatorship where you have no right to see what the government is doing or question it? Seems that you also have not been to court before, or even watched a lawyer show on TV. Witnesses or sworn, not the lawyers.
If you feel Aymond should be disbarred, feel free to file a complaint against him with the Bar Association. See how long it takes for it to hit the garbage can.
Sooth never seems to get it all right. Here he has made a number of logical and reasonable conclusion based on entirely wrong information and non-facts.
Ever wonder why they call the public records public. If I call the Pineville water department to come out at cover a manhole or shut off a fire hydrant they don't make me pay truck rental. I submit that the government is charged with maintaining, organizing, and making available all these records to an interested public.
As has been repeatedly asked on here: If it's about the money, what about the cost of resisting the request? When Roy wanted Brewer's emails nobody asked for thousand's of dollars. The city abided by the law.
Freedom of Information Act - Louisiana Public Records Law - same fucking difference. The law allows the City of Pineville to charge you and you to fucking cheap (or don't have the money which is more than likely the case) to obtain the information legally.
You want the taxpayers to pay for your attempt to keep screwing Dupree. Aymond your a joke, a bitter person, probably an amublance chaser lawyer and your program to destroy Dupree is obvious.
Stop attempting to appear as an all knowledgeable anonymous poster and wait until Swent rules. Of course then she will have, in your great legal mind, mis-interpreted the law in her ruling against you.
Every attempt you have made to legally get Dupree and others has met with no results. Your continous flogging of this dead horse indicates your stupidity.
Aymond give the world a break commit suicide.
Mr. Aymond, you should know that most of us, and I dare say the public in general, don't agree with or support the previous critical and insulting poster. Note that he never says that you are wrong or that Dupree hasn't done horrible things that could be revealed by this inquiry. He just says that despite your resort to legal means, you have not been able to nail him yet. And, of course, the poster continues to confuse the law and the facts by thinking that there is a charge for examining the records, which, of course, there is not. And I sympatize with you. I don't have $10,000 to $30,000 to invest in righting a public wrong or smoking out a criminal either. You will prevail. Judge Swent is a reasonable and honest jurist. I don't think she will be influenced by the fact that her neice and former law clerk now works for Faircloth.
Btw...the City of Alexandria NEVER did turn over Brewer's emails. The desired result was reached in that she is no longer there.
Aymond you dumb shit find where I said there was a charge for reviewing the records. There is a charge for copying the records. $3.00 a copy times 10,000 copies equals $30,000.00. Keep blowing smoke you dip shit.
If you want a copy of all 10,000 bring them a $30,000.00 check. However if any personal information relative to an employee is contained therein and you reveal it the employee should sue your ass off.
So you agree that Aymond should be allowed to review the records without charge as provided by law and be charged a "reasonable" cost of the copies he wants, unless he scans them in on the spot and then subpoenas them when he sues the shit out of PINEVILLE. Fair enough. Sounds like we have deal. Bring 'em on. Mr. Aymond, get your yellow pad and scanning device and head on over to City Hall.
I concede he has the right - cost free - to review the records. I concede he needs to aspecify what records he wants to review. I don't think he has the right to expect the City of Pineville to provide him with copies of 10,000 documents free of charge.
As far as determining what he can see and can't see I think the law is vaque enough that he can request to see Mr. Dupree's official e-mails. There should be no private e-mails on a government computer.
Then he should be given a computer and access to Dupree's e-mails and he should sit his ass down and go through them. However, notice the word - he - not his representative, no hlep;ers, him alone. Then if he wants to write to a disk let him.
This way the City incurs no cost - that is what the problem is according to Pineville. Let him sit his dead ass down and spend the time going through the e-mails not a government employee.
Then and only then whatever he finds he can use. I don't subscribe to not allowing him the rights afforded by law but neither do I subscribe to the taxpayer paying for it.
But Dear even having him "sit his dead ass down' and going through the emails is something that PINEVILLE objects to.
Did Pineville file a suit to stop the Town Talk from getting all that information they got on all the ticket fixing that goes on at City Hall in Pineville or did they just roll over and give that to them? See, the playing of games is also on the Pineville side because now they are , through there very spokesman considering Aymonds reason for requesting the emails , which incidentally is specifically and expressly prohibited in the statute. If there was nothing in the emails that is embarrassing to Pineville then they would have already given them to Aymond on a 75 cent cd disc. OR , they are using the delay to delete the emails which is a criminal act. Either way it would appear that they do not want the truth out.
You Aymond posters are a piece of work. Where did you learn to think and debate...The Lamar school of discussion?
Despite Sooth's detailed explanation, and the posting of the petition on We Saw That, you pinheads still beliueve that this fight is about the cost of copying or reviewing the e-mails
IT'S NOT!!!
It's about the cost of determining what is and is not public information!
What Aymond would have you believe is that it's all public information, however the law specifically excludes attorney/client material, personell records, medical information, and a bunch of other stuff.
Ya'll might also like to know that We Saw That excluded pages from the legal record when he posted his copy of the lawsuit.
The exhibits, which are part of the original petitionwern't posted!! These exhibits show dates, and times that papers were filed, and letters between Pineville and Aymond. I wonder why We Saw That chose not to tell everyone the whole truth?
Could it be that We Saw That is really Aymond? If not, then we know without a doubt that We Saw That is not neutral and on Aymonds side!
Wake up people, you're being scammed!
The comments critical about Billy Gunn are unfounded. If anything the Town Talk has been the City of Pinevilles promotional arm for years. Billy is doing what Morgan should have been doing and that is not falling for the Mayberry Bullshit and reported the facts. If anything , the Town Talk should be railing against the City for playing this charade with public records.
This is just a casual observation on my part but, has anyone noticed how reason dissipates when a persons genitalia are captured in a vise as in the person calling for Greg's suicide? Greg, it appears some folks are sweating the truth.
And WHY would the radio ad salesman turned Karl Rove of Pineville HAVE, litigation information, medical information, personnel information? Doesn't the City employee a City Atty, and a Human Resources person? Is Pineville violating Hippa Laws and laws related to personnel privacy information? Nothing but smoke screen to hide the truth. I wonder if this same request were made to one of the many Dupree enemies if Duprees Dummies would be singing the same excuses? Absolutely not.
16) WOW, when I first starting reading this blog I was glad to see that folks were at least interested in the underpinnings of Cenla, but I am now somewhat amused at how naive most of the posts are.
First, for the anons that complain about ties to GOPAC, GET A LIFE! The title of this blog is cenla antics. ANTICS, get it?? As defined by dictionary.com: Antics - A playful trick or prank; caper. A grotesque, fantastic, or ludicrous gesture, act, or posture. So it’s about the playful, the fantastic, the capers, the rumors and innuendoes of Cenla as it were. It doesn't matter who sponsors it. It is what it is. By that rationale should JRoy disassociate himself with LW because his blog was not appropriately subtitled "How to get on the city's payroll?" Nobody cares that you hate republicans. This blog if for dem. and repub. alike, and all the capers that they want to talk about.
Secondly, don't get sucked into the Aymond/Dupree fiasco. It is a game. Aymond wants Dupree, and Fields is willing to protect him. That's it plain and simple. Dupree is offering much resistance, and Aymond is looking for sympathy for his cause.
Judge Swent AIN'T GONNA review these emails. Are you kidding me? You must not know judges if you think any of them would sift through 1,000s of emails on Aymond's behalf. Aymond knows this, he just wants the grief to fall on Dupree for his seeming lack of cooperation. Also, probably to run up legal fees for Dupree. But that is being paid by you and me. Dupree's legal bills are tax supported. If Aymond knows of wrongdoing, he should ask specifically for what he wants and he will get it. That's the law.
Aymond's offer of disks is laughable. Does he expect to be able to sit and copy at will from Dupree's computer? What staff person will be assigned to oversee this request? Dupree himself? I don't think the taxpayers are paying to have "extra" staff available so that these types of request can be fulfilled at will. And those of you saying that these are public records, you are right, but is that how you want your tax money spent? Can someone come to your business and ask to see all your e-mails and it not cost you time and money to fill that request. Same applies here. We are the govt. And we will be the ones to fund Aymond's fishing expedition.
Just remember it's a game, but more like the gladiator games. Dupree got rid of Aymond, now Aymond is trying to return the favor. It's all about Aymond wanting to end Dupree's public employment. However, I choose not to fund it through my taxes via an email search, or the court hearing, or records request. The way the world works is if you want something bad enuff, be prepared to pay top dollar to get it.
Aymond, nothing in life is free. Break out the checkbook, and Ye shall receive!
But "Dear" you have to get around the legal reuirement that allows a citizen to review the records. The money part only applies to copies. IHMAO Aymond could walk in and say I want to see all of Dupree's official e-mails and nothing could be done to stop him.
Do you have such disgust for the waste of tax dollars when a Politician creates a whole new position at the city to give political favor to his campaign manager by hiring an uneducated ad saleman to a very high paying position paid for by those same tax dollars you have such a disgust for the wasting of? Bet ya got no burn about that do you ? Selective indignation. Its bad if its in my backyard but ok if its in yours. What hypocrits.
I agree and do not like the wasting of our taxes for that either.
A fishing expidition thru public documents is perfectly legitimate and allowed. They are PUBLIC DOCUMENTS. Pineville is responsible for making sure that exempt documents don't fall into the public's hands. It's their responsibility and their job. If they permit privileged documents to be viewed by the public that is actionable.
You are probably right. Aymond is nurishing a grudge against Dupree. The short answer would appear to be that Dupree fucked with the wrong person this time. These are (some of) the consequences of bringing a paper clip to a bazooka fight.
Of course the best action Dupree could take would be to open up his pristine clean actions to public disclosure like the law says and the truth of his rightousness will be obvious and revealed and Aymond will be shown as wrong. .....uh..If Dupree is in fact pristine and pure as advertised. If not I guess i would be trying to hide stuff.But of Course that is not going on .
Are there any interested parties to sponsoring a repeal of the dueling prohibition law? It was once very fashionable right here in our own parish with one of our illustrious residents (James Bowie - yes, of Bowie knife fame) participating in the memorable Sandbar Duel and vanquishing his rival. It may aid public discourse if words become pricier and subject matter more serious. What say you?
This should settle everyone's arguements. The key passages have been made bold.
LA RS 44-32
§32. Duty to permit examination; prevention of alteration; payment for overtime; copies provided; fees
A. The custodian shall present any public record to any person of the age of majority who so requests. The custodian shall make no inquiry of any person who applies for a public record, except an inquiry as to the age and identification of the person and may require the person to sign a register and shall not review, examine or scrutinize any copy, photograph, or memoranda in the possession of any such person; and shall extend to the person all reasonable comfort and facility for the full exercise of the right granted by this Chapter; provided that nothing herein contained shall prevent the custodian from maintaining such vigilance as is required to prevent alteration of any record while it is being examined; and provided further, that examinations of records under the authority of this Section must be conducted during regular office or working hours, unless the custodian shall authorize examination of records in other than regular office or working hours. In this event the persons designated to represent the custodian during such examination shall be entitled to reasonable compensation to be paid to them by the public body having custody of such record, out of funds provided in advance by the person examining such record in other than regular office or working hours.
B. If any record contains material which is not a public record, the custodian may separate the nonpublic record and make the public record available for examination.
C.(1)(a) For all public records, except public records of state agencies, it shall be the duty of the custodian of such public records to provide copies to persons so requesting. The custodian may establish and collect reasonable fees for making copies of public records. Copies of records may be furnished without charge or at a reduced charge to indigent citizens of this state.
(b) For all public records in the custody of a clerk of court, the clerk may also establish reasonable uniform written procedures for the reproduction of any such public record. Additionally, in the parish of Orleans, the recorder of mortgages, the register of conveyances, and the custodian of notarial records may each establish reasonable uniform procedures for the reproduction of public records.
(c) The use or placement of mechanical reproduction, microphotographic reproduction, or any other such imaging, reproduction, or photocopying equipment within the offices of the clerk of court by any person described in R.S. 44:31 is prohibited unless ordered by a court of competent jurisdiction.
(d) Any person, as provided for in R.S. 44:31, may request a copy or reproduction of any public record and it shall be the duty of the custodian to provide such copy or reproduction to the person so requesting.
(2) For all public records of state agencies, it shall be the duty of the custodian of such records to provide copies to persons so requesting. Fees for such copies shall be charged according to the uniform fee schedule adopted by the commissioner of administration, as provided by R.S. 39:241.
Copies shall be provided at fees according to the schedule, except for copies of public records the fees for the reproduction of which are otherwise fixed by law. Copies of records may be furnished without charge or at a reduced charge to indigent citizens of this state or the persons whose use of such copies, as determined by the custodian, will be limited to a public purpose, including but not limited to use in a hearing before any governmental regulatory commission.
Check this passage out people, it's why they are going to court!
(3) No fee shall be charged to any person to examine or review any public records, except as provided in this Section, and no fee shall be charged for examination or review to determine if a record is subject to disclosure, except as may be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction.
All this is about is getting Judge Swent to fix the cost that Aymond will have to pay to separate the e-mails. Swent won't review them herself, she won't give them to Aymond, she won't do a damn thing but tell Aymond if he has to pay and how much.
1) I do not support Aymond for his only purpose is retribution.
2) I do support the law of the land even if a certain law is not in my best interest. There are provisions to have laws changed or repealed.
3)LSA-R.S. 44:32(3) No fee shall be charged to any person to examine or review any
public records, except as provided in this Section, and no fee shall be
charged for examination or review to determine if a record is subject to
disclosure, except as may be determined by a court of competent
jurisdiction.
4) If this is a true extract of the law my understanding of the Enbglish language causes me to believe Aymond cannot be charged for the review unless a court decides.
5) The issue is not for Judge Swent to determine what e-mails he can have access too but whether he should be charged for the review.
6) Ayond is an asshole. Aymopnd is a vindictive asshole. Aymond is trying to destroy Dupree. However, Aymond is a citizen of the United States of America and Louisiana. Despite his motive and his being he has a right to review the records. If Pineville wants to determine what he can and cannot see it must be done free of charge unless a Judge rules differently.
7) The issue is not whether or not Aymond wants to destroy Duypree. The issues are does Aymond have a right to review the documents free of charge and does Pineville have the right to charge him for their effort to exclude documents. Simple answers - yes and no.
No matter how much we like or dislike the Bastard allowing his rights to be comprimised comprimises my rights
To this idiot:
Anon, January 26, 2007 11:24:24 AM
BECAUSE, LIKE OR NOT, HE'S CHIEF OF STAFF AND SECOND IN COMMAND OF THE CITY OF PINEVILLE YOU DUMB FUCK!
I'm all for it Spanky! We can have 'em face off on the Pineville river bank! I'll break out the popcorn and cold drinks...you get busy having tickets printed.
We'll make a "killin!"
Anybody wonder where The Northside Journal is in all this?
They jumped all over the Prestridge scandal at Pineville City Court, so we know they got balls, why are they quiet now?
NO. They are up Dupree and Fields Ass because the advertise evertime Pineville sneezes. yet another waste of tax payers money..But done to buy the Journal
Really smart ass??? Name one, just one ad that Pineville bought in TNJ that they didn't buy in the TT.
So you want us to believe that Pineville can buy off TNJ and GANNETT with a $100.00 ad????
Get real dumbass!
I suppose that you realize that there is an etiquette that is followed, such as issuing the challenge, the ability to refuse, the method of the duel if accepted, proper observation and assitance by seconds etc.. The ability to perform a proper duel requires cooperation from the community as even a refusal to accept lowers one's status. If we were to be successful in repealing the prohibition against dueling, there would need to be a time for education which should start in elementary school. It should not be too great a shock to the young ones as there are adults around them that participate in fights, shootings and stabbings on a frequent enough basis that most kindergarteners are aware of the process. Anyway, pass it around, talk, and have your people get in touch with my people.
Oh and your forgot the FULL PAGE AD that Pineville wasted our money on that appears in th ALEXANDRIA based NEWS WEEKLY to celebrate Martin Luther King day....which came out 1 week AFTER MLK. But thats being good stewards of taxpayers money Im sure. And when was the last time you ever heard of a $100 ad? If being a "dumb ass" is what its called to find such waste to be ridiculous then I bet there are a lot of dumb asses. But one thing is for sure you got people just like you (if in fact this in not in fact one of them ) running the City of Pineville.
Is it true that Vaughn Jennings is getting on woth the Mayors office? Well, how about that...a City Hall full of competent loose cannons.
Of course. IT is obvious the benefits to the City that spending money on a full page ad in an Alexandria Newspaper that comes out a week late and that is not read by many is a good way to spend tax payer dollars. Silly people of course it is.
What is Alexandria News Weekly? Ive never heard of that.
Von Jennings was Grandmaw White's aid-de-camp at the WIB. When politics got to heavy she resigned and went to the Trade School to work. Felix Mouton, also an ally, resigned from WIB to escape sexual harrassement charges and went to work at the Trade School.
In addition to being chums with Lemer's grandma Von is also the liaison of Malcom X Larvadain.
How many times does the circle of black friends of Grandma White have to be explained. Grandma White failed in her attempt to sabotage the Police Jury so now, through Lemer, she is moving her friends into City Hall.
Post a Comment