Today I received a motion to deny me the very last forensic test on the document Patricia Dillon Laub Esq told the magistrate NEVER EXISTED yet referred to a previous point in time involving the document...go figure. Liars need to remember too much as Mark Twain said.
There is an affidavit from the witness of the document.
The name of the witness is no longer on the document.
Counsel for me asked for forensics to test for the removal of the witness signature....even though I told him Janet Simpkinson pointed out that there were no abrasions on the paper, so unfortunately that test was a waste of time and money.
Then Ink date testing was performed as then it would be clear IF the date of ink was very different from the date on the witnessed document now having no witness signature.
But apparently it was not; so that indicates that what ever was done was done soon after I delivered the paper document on the strong demand of Patricia D. Laub Esq.
Forgery is what is left.
The magistrate has to rule on whether the paper, which is NOW in forensics, still there, can be allowed to be tested for forgery.
Patricia Dillon Laub et al filed a motion to deny that last test.....I think that motion to deny speaks volumes as it is not the first time malfeasance has been accomplished by Patricia Dillon Laub et al.
See here;
Attorney Jonathan Zell Esq.’s take on Patricia Dillon Laub
Esq. and her partnership in Frost Brown and Todd
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/5914ef37add7b04934967f10
No comments:
Post a Comment