Defendant: This was official court business, like I said, I’m a pro se plaintiff, ahh, she did not respond to my simple question. When did you move from Reidsville to Greensboro, and my interest in asking the question is obvious. It is lawful. It is not harassment. Now, I’m not sure if Mrs. Palmer is claiming that I threatened her if she didn’t reveal the information, but what I actually said, and I posted a couple of comments on her blog that she never will release to the public, she’s kept them in the moderation queue. Ahhh, on July 5th, I asked her “If I ask an honest question Sarah, can I get an honest answer? You can keep this in moderation if you like. When did you move to Greensboro from Reidsville? I know you started working in Greensboro November 2015, but I am hoping you will have enough respect for the truth to tell me when you moved. I have the address already, and I will alert the South Carolina clerk of court that you moved from Reidsville” – that way she could be served properly the summons – “I’m asking nicely so I’m hoping you will respond nicely. When did you move to Greensboro. Thank you. And then I gave her my email address. Ah, then I realized there was something else I wanted to tell her, so another comment followed immediately. “For instance I know you’ve been working at Premier Stores Inc. in Greensboro from November 15th.. November 2015 to present. Is that when you moved to your current address.” But again, nobody saw this because she never took it out of moderation. “I am currently pro se in this case. You really do need to treat this as a communication from an adversarial lawyer in a lawsuit. Honesty is always the best policy, right? Thanks again.” Mrs. Palmer never responded to those questions. So I sent her an email. Just to make sure she was getting, receiving the questions. Ahhh, I sent this to the last email address I had for her. “I know you moved from Reidsville to Greensboro. I know you started working at Premier Foods November 2015. When did you move… oh, you read this already. Never mind. She didn’t respond so I tried calling her at the phone number for the address listed on beenverified.com and left two messages. Again, I’m just seeking information that as a pro se representative I have a right to know. These were the same nature of the comments and the tweets. No threats. No extortion. Just a request for information.
Lawsuit Scoreboard
Your Zombie Mistress
Recent Comments
Kyle Kiernan on Oh Yes. Jourminalism! Dr_Mike on Oh Yes. Jourminalism! John “Minemyown” Doe on Oh Yes. Jourminalism! Pablo on Oh Yes. Jourminalism! Pablo on Oh Yes. Jourminalism! Because All the Cool Kids Are Doing It
BILLY SEZ - Adventures in Bill Schmalfeldt's Pretendy Land Internet Courtroom. All Rise! 
Pretty sure he has a responsibility to know your address. Not sure he has a right to that information. Rights and responsibilities have always given him trouble.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Hey, I have a couple questions…
When DUMBFUCK sued you and Eric Johnson in Wisconsin in 2015, did he successfully serve process on you?
If he did serve you successfully, when did that happen?
When it happened, did you live in Reidsville?
Was this before or after you got the first no contact order?
LikeLiked by 10 people
1. Yes
2. February 2016 by process server
3. Yes
4. After
LikeLiked by 10 people
Wait, does this mean that DUMBFUCK knew the answer to his Very Important Question (with certainty) all along?
Oopsie poopsie!
LikeLiked by 11 people
LikeLiked by 9 people
Click to access gov.uscourts.wied.72179.1.0.pdf
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Do not contact me” does not contain an “unless your have a question you really want an answer to” exception.
No means no, DUMBFUCK.
LikeLiked by 9 people
Cousin Roy has suggested that Lulcow Billy has always had a problem with that concept.
LikeLiked by 7 people
I know Cousin Roy has talked about an event where the Fat Pedoketeer didn’t take no for an answer. But the Backdoor Lover wrote about a different event with a different victim where he again refused to take no for an answer. So that particular question has already been answered. He’s a self-admitted rapist.
LikeLiked by 7 people
I believe the following is to what you are referring, John.
WARNING: NSFW! An absolutely disgusting, vile, and evil “story” written and shared by the Deranged Cyberstalker Bill Schmalfeldt!
http://archive.is/liy40
LikeLiked by 1 person
He makes me just shake my head…
“I have the address already…”. So he already had all the information he needed for his hurt feelz suit. So why continue to harass and threaten (yes Bill, saying you’re going to have her brought up on perjury is a threat)? Not to mention the contacting of the ex and posting pictures of someones house. What were the reasons for that Bill?
You’re a fucking creepy McCreeperson cyberstalker. Only YOU can change that…
Be well.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Jhe said over and over in the posts I saw that he had her address. So there was no legal purpose for the contact. It’s irrelevant to any lending legal matter when Sarah moved, the previous restraining order had also expired so there was no other information that he could gain that would have any present effect, didn’t have any effect on him, and could have no future effect on him.
He’s so crazy. he actually describing in fine detail his harassment. He is just like a figure in Gavin De Becker’s book.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Lending = pending
LikeLiked by 1 person
BTW I just saw his super creepy response to the “crux of the biscuit” post where people were making fun of his odd use of a stupid pretentious reference, I can imagine he was thinking he would stun the judge with his iconoclastic flair a intellectual depth. I presume his pork pie costume was to cement the impression. What an old fool he is.
LikeLiked by 9 people
I am an old fool, Bill is an old, decrepit child of Satan …Who smells of shit and death …
LikeLiked by 3 people
His self image is one of the strangest things about him. He seems to comprehend, and is proud of, his obnoxiousness, but he thinks he’s clever and should be noticed. He thinks his looks are interesting and charming. It’s not so much that he’s not a prize, because hey, most people aren’t all that much to see; it’s that he believes he is and the contrast with reality is freaky.
LikeLiked by 3 people
” “For instance I know you’ve been working at Premier Stores Inc. in Greensboro from November 15th.. November 2015 to present. Is that when you moved to your current address.”
No, that doesn’t sound like a stalker. “I know where you work”.
Sheesh, what an oaf.
LikeLiked by 5 people
X represents the plaintiff in a law suit approved by a federal court for service by US agents. Y, a defendant in that suit, has specifically told X not to contact Y. X does contact Y to ask for information of no possible relevance to the approved suit. Is X’s contact excused because X represents the plaintiff?
Clearly the answer is no.
The date when Ash moved had no relevance to the suit approved for service by the court in South Carolina. It may have had relevance to a contemplated amendment to that suit. But contemplated defendants in contemplated suits have no obligation whatsoever to provide to anyone information that may be relevant to the contemplated suit.
“Hey Sarah, I know that you told me not to contact you and that I am currently suing you, but be polite and give me some information that may be relevant to a new charge that I am thinking of adding to the suit.”
The reason so many people think it is insulting to rocks to say that Willy is as dumb as one is because no rock ever did anything that dumb. As a result, Willy can now proudly add to his magnificent collection of restraining and peace orders. I believe courts in Massachusetts, Maryland, Arizona, Illinois, and North Carolina have supplied material to the collection, some of them more than once.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ladies and gentlemen he has admitted in open court–under oath no less–to violating the FRCP. That my friends is an improper discovery request.
LikeLiked by 9 people
He references beenverified.com. That costs $14.86 for 3 months. A minor expense but still-
I had no idea this thing existed but it answers one of my questions on what’s in Schmalfeldts’ doxxing toolbox. I count this as one of the downsides of the internet.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You can remove yourself from their results here: https://www.beenverified.com/f/optout/search
LikeLiked by 2 people
Which I have done, but I almost didn’t bother. Their info on me had a few issues, some of them pretty major, which could cause some difficulties for anyone relying on it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
SWEET!
Dude, as far as I’m concerned YOU win The Internet! At least for today- Thanks Pablo!
BONG BONG BONG BONG!!! (You knew this was coming…) DOXX ALERT DOXX ALERT!!! ALL HANDS TO RESEARCH STATIONS!!!
“Ok. All I have to do is subpoena beenverified for a list of those trying to opt out. I’ll get w for sure. Hate that he knows my fixation on Hillary so well. And who knows how many other Lickspittles I’ll scoop up? Pay for that? No way. I can IFP my way through. And- Sympathy. I can also rely on sympathy to gain what I need to know. Who could possibly refuse a poor Parkinson-ed well meaning soul who has little more than the goodness for all mankind, excepting Hoge, Krendler, MJ, Ashterah, Eric, Trump and any number of D’ohs in his black little heart? Hmmm… Not sure, either, about Dianna, now that I think about it. Yeah. That’s the ticket. I’ll pro se the idjits at beenverified. Gonna’ collect the whole set gonna’ get them ALL!”
Home. Half-lit.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Two things:
He answered the complaint by affirming he contacted you, and ensured the Judge had more than enough to find he made unlawful contact.
He failed to mention he wanted to have you prosecuted for perjury and would do so if you failed to respond.
He lied about extortion.
LikeLiked by 7 people
So he perjured himself about extorting someone else with a false perjury charge.
That’s epic level incompetent, pathetic dumbfuck right there. No wonder he couldn’t keep a job.
LikeLiked by 4 people
First, I don’t know how you should treat an adversarial lawyer, outside of discovery, after you’ve been served (I suspect, “sod off!” unless responding to a motion) but you haven’t been served yet.
Second, since his entire reason for this is to somehow incriminate you in a perjury trap, even within discovery you would be well within your rights to plead the Fifth (Amendment.)
Third, I think Bill’s been getting a little too familiar with the Fifth (of JWR.)
LikeLike
Clarification, _hadn’t_ been served, during the dates this adjuticated cyber harrassment occurred.
LikeLike
She had no obligation to have contact with him of any kind.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I know, I’m just gaming out his pretendyland “pro-se prosecuter” fantasy. The polite result I get to is “sod off!”
LikeLiked by 1 person
He goes down some particularly tortured yes-legs on his mental maps.
LikeLike
I still haven’t been served. I just chose to have my lawyer enter his notification now.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Lady Catherine De Bedbug had no right to ask, by means of personal contact, let alone get an answer to any of his questions.
He wanted the information? So What? Because he ought to find out her current address, doesn’t mean he is entitled to get it from her, or to bother her, and in fact He had a proper address and didn’t need any other; he had no right to pester her directly for any other information, not at this time, and he wasn’t obligated to ask it now, or lose any right to discovery later—– and she wasn’t obligated to answer.
There was no scenario under which any of that moving date information could possibly concern him in the past, present or future tense.
Today’s I-ching of Austen:
I am shocked and astonished. I expected to find a more reasonable young woman. But do not deceive yourself into a belief that I will ever recede. I shall not go away till you have given me the assurance I require.”
“And I certainly never shall give it. I am not to be intimidated into anything so wholly unreasonable
LikeLiked by 3 people
If said Lady Catherine De Bedbug enquires on Bill’s behalf to a party that holds a current RO against Bill; then Bill is in breach of the RO. RO are strictly enforced when it comes to the stalker using a 3rd party to make contact on their behalf.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Exactly, SecurityFlunky.
If the Deranged Cyberstalker Bill Schmalfeldt’s dumb, cackling, gross roommate has *any* degree of common sense, xhe will keep xer head down. The Blob WILL (continue to) try his damnedest to weaponize xer. Xhe should really start thinking long and hard as to whether or not a new set of choppers is worth the complete mess he is in the process of making both of their already-pathetic lives.
Things can… and, will… get worse.
LikeLike