Spoliation of the Day

Remember when Bill Schmalfeldt said…

Ashampoo_Snap_2016.08.17_11h12m15s_059_

Oh wait. He deleted it from the Internet. My bad.

Advertisements

About The Dread Pirate Zombie

Member of the Zombie Horde and Lickspittle Minion. Out to eat your brainnnsssss. And a few other sweetbreads because they are so nomm-y. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to Spoliation of the Day

  1. BusPassOffice says:

    He was FORCED to attack my 16 year old daughter – I would just say to him and his free lawyer – please please please come to Tennessee, the DA would LOVE TO MEET YA.

    Please come to Tennessee and explain why you have been and still are sexually harassing my daughters

    Oh and bring the child porn letter from Microsoft as your defense

    Liked by 6 people

  2. BusPassOffice says:

    What kind of monster broadcasts audio child porn from a convent while pretending to be disabled? So disabled he cannot travel but when he can travel. Oh and then goes for long walks while being wheel chair bound and makes podcasts 12 years after saying his voice is failing.

    DID YOU GUYS HAVE TIME TO DISCUSS YOUR 9 RESTRAINING ORDERS? OR DID YOU JUST SIGN THE CLIENT AGREEMENT LEAVE THE BOX AND GO TO MEET YOUR MORNING TRAIN.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Neal N. Bob says:

      Lolcow Billy fancies himself a child rape comedian, which is supposed to be different.

      If we get really lucky, this time a jury might get to decide that, now that he has a welfare lawyer to craft his whelpish mewlings in a way that doesn’t get automatically dismissed due to his overwhelming ignorance of almost everything, although even that doesn’t get him over the high hurdle of contributory negligence.

      That the Diminished Capacity Kid actually wants that before a jury of his peers says more about his mental state than I ever could.

      Liked by 8 people

  3. Jane says:

    Indonesia isn’t far enough away to avoid the attention of the creeptastic freakshow, repeatedly adjudicated stalker and harasser.

    You know, a lot of people, probably most people, knowing nothing else about the situation, would likely think, ‘How sad that family has to be separated. The poor dad probably had to stay behind to work to be able to take care of the family financially, and to maintain the stateside property of the family. Lucky mom can follow the children because dad made the sacrifice for the family, and lucky children have mom with them cos dad made the sacrifice for the family.’

    Of course that wouldn’t occur to a loathsome loser who never spent a day worrying about providing for its abandoned children, nor ever sacrificed anything for anyone.

    Liked by 7 people

  4. Neal N. Bob says:

    “Accurately representing everything I’ve done is … CHARACTER ASSASSINATION!!!!”

    Liked by 7 people

  5. BusPassOffice says:

    Bill Schmalfeldt ‏@SchmalfeldtBill · 28m28 minutes ago

    LOGIC: When you post “Spoliation of the Day” you prove the item is NOT “spoliated.” If you have it, it exists, therefore not “spoliated.”

    Why is the WORLDS STUPIDIEST CLIENT STILL TALKING ABOUT THE CASE.

    I’ll bet you not only deleted this but if and when discovery is issued for ALL YOUR INTERNET WRITINGS and you have failed to retain your massive deletions our SAVING IT DOES NOT SAVE YOU. IT PROVES THAT YOU ARE THE WORLDS STUPIDIEST CLIENT, and that you knew your sexually harassing underage girls while making child porn audio rape fantasy’s with special urination editions, was a BIG TIME NO NO.

    DID YOU REMEMBER THAT YOU TWEETED THAT YOU PLAYED THE PORN FOR THE APARTMENT MANAGER? DID YOU EVEN REMEMBER THAT ONE – or was it in a blog post or both?

    MIGHT WANT TO SEARCH YOUR RECORDS FOR THAT

    BILLOGICAL BILLSPANATIONS BILLSHIT

    Yeah DID YOU SHOW THE TWO PAGE ARTICLE YOU WROTE ABOUT ME RAPING MY KIDS TO COURT COURT APPOINTED NON VOLUNTARY HAVE-TO-REPRESENT-YOU-LAWYER THERE SKIPPY?

    ASK YOUR FREE LAWYER HOW HE IS GOING TO DEFEND THAT TO A JURY JUST AS A THEORY, OR HOW YOU DOXXED A DEAD BABY AND ARE STILL HARASSING THE MOTHER AND FILED FALSE CPS REPORTS IN TEXAS.

    YEAH THATS THE TICKET, HOW MANY CHILDREN HAVE YOU TRIED TO HARM? HOW MANY BILL?

    Liked by 7 people

    • He is such an unmitigated fool.

      Spoliation is based on what the person who created the documents does. It has NOTHING to do with what the receiver did.

      Spoliation wasn’t something I really studied since what we were being taught was basically “DON’T!!”, but as it stands now, if the only version is what someone else saved, there is no way Bill can disagree with it. He could try to claim that it had been altered to make him look worse, but since he himself discarded the original, there is no way he can prove that, and the jury instructions would be to assume that any documents he destroyed/deleted were destroyed/deleted because they would have helped prove the other side’s case.

      http://civilprocedure.uslegal.com/discovery/spoliation-of-evidence/

      When a crucial document is lost by spoliation, the courts may try to infer the original information by applying spoliation inference rule. Spoliation inference rule is a negative evidentiary inference. When applying the rule, courts will review the altered document with inference against the spoliator and in favor of the opposing party. The theory behind spoliation inference is that when a party has destroyed evidence, it shows that the party had consciousness of guilt or other reasons to avoid evidence. Hence, the court will conclude that the evidence was not in spoliator’s favor.
      [snip]
      Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 37 possible sanctions are as follows:
      ◙ dismissal of the wrongdoer’s claim;
      ◙ entering judgment against the wrongdoer;
      ◙ exluding expert testimony; and
      ◙ application of adverse inference rule.
      Additionally, Rule 37 imposes fines on the wrongdoer.

      Note the first of those bulleted points. It does NOT specify only the defendants. It specifies dismissing a claim by whichever party spoliated the evidence. Note also that there is nothing there which suggests that just because someone else happened to save a copy that spoliation did not occur. It does state that by destroying/deleting a document/webpage/email/tweet/whatever, the destroyer is acknowledging that he/she did something he/she should not have.

      I’m sure that Mr. Hoge hasn’t spoliated anything. Bill can’t say the same, and he can’t be 100% sure that everything he’s gotten rid of was saved by a third party. (I suspect he’s hoping that not everything was saved.)

      Liked by 5 people

      • Jane says:

        It’s a good thing for the malicious maggot that TFS are honest people who wouldn’t alter their copy of a document, including tweets, after finding out through discovery that the fat freak didn’t retain a copy.

        Not so good for the lying laardvark that TFS will have a fairly complete list of items to request. The repulsive reprobate can produce authenticated docs, or suffer the consequences of its rampant spoliation over the course of years. Remember, the stolen valor Lyin’ of Lebanon has either been involved in, or threatening, litigation for over a decade.

        Liked by 7 people

    • Oh come on now dummy. You will not have access to the vault for discovery.

      Although, your victims will.

      Ponder that.

      Liked by 7 people

  6. BusPassOffice says:

    As an aside, YOU REALLY NEED TO STOP TALKING ESPECIALLY INSINUATIONS ABOUT THINGS THAT HARM THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN TASKED TO AIDE YOU.

    YOU WROTE ABOUT THE APARTMENT MANAGERS PRIVATE PARTS, YOU KEEP MENTIONING YOUR LAWYER, HIS ADVICE TO YOU IS HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL, AND YOU KEEP MENTIONING THE DOCTORS.

    I KNOW YOU JUST ARE BURNING TO THREATEN AND HARASS THROUGH THE ACTIONS OF THIS POOR MAN WHO HAS TO REPRESENT YOU TO MAINTAIN HIS PRIVILEGES OF A MAJOR PART OF HIS LIVELYHOOD, BUT FOR GOD’S SAKE DONT RUIN HIM WITH YOUR DISHONESTLY, FORGERY, SPOLIATIONS, THREATS, SEXUAL HARASSMENT OF MINORS, HARASSMENT OF MINORS, AND DONT THREATEN TO RAPE OR WRITE ABOUT THE RAPE ANY MORE CHILDREN THIS WEEK! AND KEEP YOUR PEE TO YOURSELF, NO ONE PEE’S ON CHILDREN, THATS A LOSER IN MOST COURTROOMS.

    YOU NEED TO REMAIN SILENT, OH THATS RIGHT 3 to 4 million words online later – THATS NOT HAPPENING NOW IS IT?

    Liked by 7 people

  7. BusPassOffice says:

    HEY WORLDS STUPIDIEST CLIENT.

    EXPLAINING TO THE POOR COURT APPOINTED ATTORNETY HOW YOU SUED THAT YOU WERE NOT ASSOCIATED WITH TERRORISTS, THAT YOU HAD NOW IDEA WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT

    AND……THEN……IN……THE…….SAME…….LAWSUIT……… YOU ENTERED IN A MULTI PAGE AFFIDAVIT …….FROM A FUCKING VIOLENT REPEAT TERRORIST WHO SET OF BOMBS AT CHILDRENS EVENTS AND PUBLIC STREETS WHO YOU AND HE CALL EACH OTHER ASSOCIATES?.

    AND THEN YOU HARASSED THE WIFE OF MY ATTORNEY THAT YOU MOCKED HER LOOKING FOR BOMBS UNDER THEIR CAR.

    YEAH, THATS ANOTHER ONE YOY DIDNT DISCLOSE TO YOUR COUNSEL.

    Liked by 7 people

  8. Perry Mason says:

    Bill Schmalfeldt ‏@SchmalfeldtBill 2h2 hours ago

    LOGIC: When you post “Spoliation of the Day” you prove the item is NOT “spoliated.” If you have it, it exists, therefore not “spoliated.”

    Does this statement constitute an admission that all the tweets and blog posts saved by the Lickspittles are, in fact, true and accurate representations of the originals?

    ‘Cause that would save a lot of time and effort in court.

    Liked by 12 people

    • Didn’t his lawyer tell him to STFU online with regards to anything to do with his case? I’d think that claiming that stuff he dumped but others saved is accurate and therefore admissible in court might tick said attorney off.

      Liked by 6 people

    • Jane says:

      Still not talking about the case (/sarc), and still trying to parse and manipulate the language in a way to indicate the loathsome loser deleting potential evidence ≠ deleting potential evidence.

      The depraved and demented DUMBF5CK is trying to believe that deleting potential evidence ≠ spoliation ≠ blowing up whatever infinitesimal chance the lawyer (because of his education, extensive experience, and great skill), may have been able to put together something that could survive a mtd.

      And it appears lying laardvark can’t even convince its vile self.

      Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s