As Stern stated upthread, many documents were obtained today from our gumshoe in MS. Some of them we've seen, and I think some not, but rather than try to ferret that out I'm just going to post them all here, hopefully in some sort of order (but not necessarily ).

2012-02-04 - MS - Taitz Original Petition

2012-02-29 - MS - SoS Memo in Support of Motion to Dismiss

2012-03-07 - MS - MSDP Motion to Dismiss and for Sanctions

2012-03-12 - MS - TAITZ Opposition to Motion to Dismiss and Motion...

2012-03-21 - MS - MSDP Motion in Limine

2012-03-21 - MS - ORDER Setting Hearing for April 16, 2012

2012-03-22 - MS - MSDP Response in Opposition to Taitz Motion for Sanctions and to Amend...

2012-03-22 - MS - SoS Opposition to Taitz Motion for Summary Judgment...

2012-03-26 MS - MSDP Motion to Require Affidavits

Talk about a (perjury) trap....

I mentioned up thread that requiring Orly to file one of these affidavits was one thing the Democratic Party's attorney had not done. Now he has. The affidavit:

I, (__________), petitioner (or complainant, plaintiff, appellant or whatever party he may be) in this matter, do hereby swear (or affirm) that I have neither received, nor conspired to receive, any valuable consideration or assistance whatever as an inducement to the commencement or further prosecution of the proceedings in this matter.
_________________________
(Signature of Affiant)
_________________________
Affiant
Sworn to and subscribed before me on this, the (________) day of(________), 19 (____).
_________________________
(Signature of Official)
_________________________
(Title of Official)

(1) Can she honestly sign this (if she was honest)? and (2) Will she sign it anyway?

IANL, but:

Probably not, and yes. In that order.

Emergency Earplugs Ready!

Prepared for Screeching to Commence!

Delicious stuff.

Hizzoner has any number of reasons to dismiss Orly's pile of poo outright, beginning with the timeliness of the action in general, as amply supplemented by defect upon defect in all of the plaintiff's filings.

The big question, as I see it, is whether the Judge will decide to take the path of least resistant and swat the gnat with one flick of the wrist versus toying with her (for the good of the judiciary everywhere, natch). Oh, I do so hope he chooses the latter.

The fact that he's set a hearing date is a hopeful sign, IMO.

Yoo hoo, Dr. Orly! This is the perfect time to double-down again.

Maybe he was still busy securing some screenshots off Orlys website, e.g. her call for money and her thank-yous to the sponsors. I wish the attorney will ask for and subpoena the books fo Orlys Defend Our Freedoms Foundation ...

Actually, Myanmar is a pretty cool place to visit, along with Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia (Bali, anyone?), and of course, Singapore.

And in a nod to the Greenies,

[/threadjack]

Subpoenaing the books of Orly's Defend Our Freedom(s) Foundation is like subpoenaing the records of all Americans and aliens flying from Kenya to the USA between July 1st of 1961 and June 30th of 1962.

But if the books existed, or were created on the double fly by some advanced record-breaking software written by her husband's gifted programmers (using the archives of her websites), would that help Orly, or incriminate her?

Orly could get a year in the state pen? I hear MS prisons are more like a gulag (just a step down from a FEMA camp)so she should feel right at home.

Hmmm -- she can always ask Arpaio for a sample of free underware.

I wish to see the future emails between inmates Taitz and Fitzpatrick comparing their situation

Why should drunk drivers be prohibited from obtaining diving licenses? Does somebody fear that they will get into their scuba suits while intoxicated?

I can't quite figure out what she would be allowed and not allowed to do financially under this thing. (I don't want to help her, for once, so put it in code if you answer.)

Again, she doesn't redact the SSN, that was the first thing I noticed.

For a variety of reasons, Orly cannot be convicted of champerty in these proceedings. Just as Orly cannot bring criminal charges against President Obama, Mr. Begley cannot directly bring criminal charges against Orly.

However, it's certainly possible to conduct oneself so stupidly in court as to build a damning record for subsequent prosecution. But even this brings into play Constitutional protections. Although she's arguably been put on notice that her conduct may violate Mississippi law, at the very minimum, she'd be due a warning in Court (e.g., in the nature of a Miranda recitation) the moment it became clear the proceedings were delving into the elements of a crime. And, face it, champerty is an anachronism even in states with statutes that still keep it on life support.

IMO, Mr. Begley does not expect this suit to result in Orly Taitz's conviction for champerty. By raising the issue, he's radically shifting the dynamics of the case. Sanctionable litigation behavior is not limited to what the layman might consider "frivolous". Carried to the extreme, an action is sanctionable if it goes so far beyond legal standards as to be facially unlawful.

Furthermore, I think Mr. Begley hopes to use this as a vehicle to educate the judge about the scope, ulterior aims and repetitive costs of Orly's litigious behavior. Thus far, judges have operated with "blinders on" and, therefore limited discipline to that which was immediately before them, if at all. And frankly, it's easier for a judge to kick the can down the road.

Viewed as a whole, her "law practice" has for a period of years repetitively abused the judicial process for the illegitimate purposes of raising funds, fomenting hatred, levying otherwise slanderous allegations (the litigation privilege notwithstanding), garnering publicity, promoting herself, seeking purely political objectives, diverting public resources and subjecting the judiciary and the legal community to disrepute.

Mr. Begley is attempting to put all this into play -- or is at least threatening to put it all in play. If it works, and the judge is listening, my hat is off to him.

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=33818

WHAT is this??? This isn't a subpoena. What IS IT???

And then just like Orly ships her GA crapola to every jurisdiction her MS transcript can be shipped to all the jurisdictions by the defense.

IT IS crap.

In California, a party may send another party a "notice to appear" at an evidenciary hearing or trial in order to give testimony.

But this ain't California and Arpaio ain't no party. She needs a subpoena.

You, of course, noticed the citation to Mississippi law.

Do MS Prisons have Windows? Or is that redundant?

She has sent the same notice to Mike Zullo.

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=33822

Boy, we are in for quite a screeching when none of them show.

There will be lots of screeching when someone drinks Typhoid Orly's milkshake, too.

Under Orlylaw, do these NTAs allow her to reopen the Georgia proceedings, the Hawaii proceedings, or both?