Motivation. Why do we do the things that we do?
Bill Schmalfeldt seems to think that people don’t understand his motivations. And that people are incorrect when the say that he projects his motivations onto others. But, is that the case?
I don’t think so.
If you check out a post that you can find HERE, I think there is more than ample evidence as to what Bill Schmalfeldt’s motivations are.
In a letter sent to our lawyer, Bill claims that he is merely bringing to Mr. Nettle’s attention certain things that he, Bill, deems as inappropriate in John Hoge’s behavior. And getting in his jabs at the rest of us.
Absolutely nothing in the letter, not a single statement, assertion, question, conclusion – any of it – is something that is appropriate to send to opposing counsel. The fact that he even felt it necessary to send such a letter just shows his complete and utter lack of understanding of how both polite society and the legal system works. He just wanted information and thought he deserved to get the answers he wanted. He also wanted a few other things, but we’ll get to that in a bit.
In the first two sentences, Bill uses no fewer than 18 adjectives and/or descriptive phrases to convey his disdain for John Hoge. Then there are multiple paragraphs that outline how much money is needed to appeal the verdict in the Hoge v. Kimberlin et al. case. All ending in a declaration that Hoge has no problem flushing the thousands of dollars an appeal costs down the drain.
The idea that Hoge has that kind of funds at his disposal obviously irks Bill. He most certainly wishes that he had that kind of money. Previously, he claimed he was flush as well. That he had enough if he was careful to last a good long time. If only he hadn’t of flushed it down the toilet on a music machine. And that scooty puff. It was red. Vroom, vroom!
But then comes Bill’s masterpiece. The letter to Mr. Nettles. And his reason for writing it.
You see, Bill apparently thinks that it is UNSEEMLY for John Hoge to check the costs necessary for an appeal should he so choose to file one, and say that he can pay for it if he chooses to do so. Unseemly for him to hire a lawyer to collect monies owed to him when it will more than likely cost more in fees than would be recovered.
What really stuck in Bill’s craw though is the mere idea Hoge can spend money and yet still be represented pro bono in the lawsuit Bill has against him. Because we all know Bill Schmalfeldt believes himself to be the world’s most worthy pro-se prosecutor who really should be the one with the pro bono lawyer.
Unfortunately, he has yet to find one willing to take his case. Curious, that.
And so, in a letter that shows to Mr. Nettles just what sort of a person he really is, Bill Schmalfeldt runs to tell tales, whines that Mr. Nettles hasn’t spoken to Bill more, insinuates that Mr. Nettles isn’t representing his clients properly, inquires if he is still representing said clients, disparages said clients, seeks to be flattered on his legal prowress, says that he will be such an AWESOMELY sympathetic plaintiff because MUH DISABILITY, and then tells Mr. Nettles that he wants comments from him on this so that he can write an article about it all.
One has to appreciate the brevity Mr. Nettles brought to his response to Bill’s letter. None of his questions were appropriate, and so they would not be answered. And don’t ever send him anything of this sort ever again.
But what does all of this have to do with Bill Schmalfeldt’s motivations? In the letter to Mr. Nettles, Bill says that he isn’t doing this for money. He’s doing it to make people stop libeling him.
But that really isn’t Bill’s motivation.
Bill’s motivation is jealousy. Pure and simple jealousy. It couldn’t be more palpable.
Now, I’m not saying that he is jealous necessarily of the people he is suing – they are just convenient vessels for venting his emotions. But Bill Schmalfeldt is jealous of anyone who has something, some glimmer of a thing, that is more than what he has.
And because Bill Schmalfeldt’s life is so bereft of anything of true value, he covets any outward expression people have that reflect the things he has not. Anytime they mention things like being financially secure and the ability to pay for certain things or having a lawyer that actually approached them to defend them for free, it is an emotional stab to Bill. Not one that the object of Bill’s attention has actually done, but rather one that Bill’s psyche has inflicted upon himself.
The psychic wounds he inflicts upon himself means there is only one response he can make – that he has to strike back in the most twisted way he can think to try and deflect the pain away from himself.
And so we get this LOLLetter written to opposing counsel. Trying to sow discord, seeking to wound.
Someone got the back of someone’s hand in that exchange.
Maybe someone should read another set of local rules. And have a better result the next time.