Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
PilcheskyDeceit True Freedom of Speech -> True Freedom of Speech ... Pilchesky denies Freedom of Speech -> The nets are on the boat.
Post Info TOPIC: The nets are on the boat.
sharilewis


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 428
Date:
The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

I posted a few days ago about another big fish, tangled in Pilchesky's net. Another one of Doherty's fav's are in it. In a few days, you'll hear about it. I thought it would be a bombshell by now. Another rule breaker.

__________________
His Girl Thursday


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 2621
Date:
The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

... and the check is in the mail.

__________________

Stupid people piss me off !
LusOnlyVoice


Site Administrator

Status: Offline
Posts: 5099
Date:
The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

Joe Pilchesky



Posts: 1045
Date: Mon Jun 18 12:34 AM, 2007
Views: 38
Quote | Reply
Pilchesky vs. McDowell - Petition to toss from ballot
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's the Petition I will file Monday morning in an effort to have Ken McDowell removed from the November election. CLICK HERE

It's the first of two action against Ken, the second one will ask him to return his pay since he was elected due to the fact that he hasn't worked a day since.



This isn't the big fish you refer to is it? Well if we couldn't see this one coming ... we would have all been blind ... Joe Pilchesky is getting very predictable ... I am assuming that this is what Shari was talking about!

-- Edited by LusOnlyVoice at 04:59, 2007-06-18

__________________

I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet.  Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
justducky


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 201
Date:
The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

What number is this one, I dont know about anyone else but this is getting RIDICULOUS, every week this clown is suing someone else, I for sure would like to know how much his lawsuits have cost the city, to hire lawyers and such. I guess since it is JOE it is ok, but when Mr. cordaro or mrs gatelli fight back, then its not ok DOUBLE STANDARD here we go again. when is this going to stop.! I as a taxpayer for one am shocked and outraged, of course his followers dont really care, because most of them dont work(so they dont pay the wage tax) and they dont own their homes(so they dont pay real estate tax) so IN MY OPINION WHY SHOULD ANY OF THEM CARE!, sorry im beginning to ramble on like LUS(sorry Lus dont mean to steal your line) hope you all have a nice day and stay cool. I'm off to WORK

__________________
His Girl Thursday


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 2621
Date:
The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

Jeez Shari - you thought I was the only one giving you a ration of $hit about how much the old man is costing the city. Hmmm, looks to be there are others concerned about this as well.



__________________

Stupid people piss me off !
LusOnlyVoice


Site Administrator

Status: Offline
Posts: 5099
Date:
The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

That's quite alright Ducky ... I actually am quite proud of my ramblings .... LOL

I want to know what the cost is myself ... I have written to two members of council ... with no answer from on and a flat out I don't know ... from another (Janet and Bill). I am going to write to the city clerks office and possibly then I can find out ... I really want to know what the cost to the city has been from the very first filed against the city to the present time ... now up to and including the Ken McDowell suit.



__________________

I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet.  Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
justducky


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 201
Date:
RE: The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

Post InfoTOPIC: The SPD vs. Sam
Antisystemicmovements

avatar.img?ID=37760

Posts: 998
Date: Mon Jun 18 9:42 PM, 2007
Views: 232
Quote | Reply
The SPD vs. Sam

https://ujsportal.pacourts.us/

Look up Sam Patilla.

Apparently Sam went before Farrell on 6/14/2007. I thought for sure Sam would have to go before Russel. Apparently Alice Hailstone Farrell, who is known for going easy on ICNers (particularly for parking tickets), is more appropriate to take revenge against Sam. After all, Farrell is a "partner" in Scranton's redevelopment.

Anyhow, Sam is charged with the following:

1. Disrupting a meeting
2. Obstructing administration of law
3. Disorderly Conduct



__________________
Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please...but under circumstances... trasmitted from the past. The tradition of all the dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living. -- Karl Marx
Joe Pilchesky

joepilchesky.gif

Posts: 1050
Date: Mon Jun 18 11:01 PM, 2007
Views: 138
Quote | Reply
RE: The SPD vs. Sam

Section 5508: Disrupting Meetings and Processions

A person commits a misdemeanor of the third degree if, with intent to prevent or disrupt a lawful meeting, procession or gathering, he disturbs or disrupts it. (Judy Gatelli has done that repeatedly)

Section 5101: Obstruction administration of law or other governmental function.

A person commits a misdemeanor of the second degree if he intentionally obstructs, impairs or perverts the administration of law or other governmental function by force, violence, physical interference or obstacle, breach of official duty, or any other unlawful act, except that this section does not apply to flight by a person charged with a crime, refusal to submit to arrest, failure to perform a legal duty other than an official duty, or any other means of avoiding compliance with law without affirmative interference with governmental functions. (Judy Gatelli has repeatedly done this, too)

Section 5503: Disorderly Conduct
(a) Offense defined: a person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he:
(1) engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior;
(2) makes unreasonable noise;
(3) uses obscene language, or makes an obscene gesture; or
(4) creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose of the actor.
(b) Grading: an offense under this section is a misdemeanor of the third degree if the intent of the actor is to cause substantial harm or serious inconvenience, or if her persists in disorderly conduct after reasonable warning or request to desist. Otherwise disorderly conduct is a summary offense.
(c) Definition: - as used in this section, the word "public" means effecting or likely to effect persons in a place to which the public or substantial group has access: among the places included are highways, transport facilities, schools, prisons, apartment houses, places of business or amusement, any neighborhood, or any premises which are open to the public.
(Every time Judy Gatelli opens her mouth it's unreasonable noise)

I've watced that tape quite a few times, I only saw Sam try in vain to enjoy that thing called free speech until Judy Gatelli repeatedly interrupted him, provoking him as much as possible.



wizzy
Posts: 165
Date: Mon Jun 18 11:26 PM, 2007
Views: 120
Quote | Reply
The SPD vs. Sam

Why wasn't Charlie Newcomb charged??? He started the whole thing. Something stinks!!!!

Joe Pilchesky

joepilchesky.gif

Posts: 1050
Date: Mon Jun 18 11:58 PM, 2007
Views: 96
Quote | Reply
RE: The SPD vs. Sam

It's apparent to me, at least in my broadened view, that Mr. Newcombe is the wrong color, while Sam is colored perfectly for this scenario. By the way that Mr. Newcombe has been crawling up the administration's ass of late, and if anything stinks it's that, perhaps he was there to push to right button. Newcombe is not the vintage anti-Doherty warrior we once knew. He's seems uncomfortable with his new crony gig, but he's doing it. Must be painful, so I do have to feel sorry for him, but a Dad is a Dad is a Dad. We can all relate to that as Dads. Perhaps the old standbys like Keeler are unavailable given the election results. Who knows, but one thing is certain, Sam was set up by Nazi Gatelli and unfortunatley, he got swept up in a "free man's" moment. How can we help Sam? That's the question.

He's not going to walk this walk alone, that I can promise Nazi Gatelli. As a deposit on my support of the abuse of Sam, as soon as he's served with his Criminal Complaint and I see a copy thereof, which I don't believe is necessarily what is posted here, I shall file the Libel lawsuit against Sherry Fanucci. As a matter-in-fact, I'll file a lawsuit a week against somebody, in either federal or state court, as further support. And, Nazi Gatelli can use a few criminal charges placed against her the way I see it. "Free men" shouldn't stand alone when there are other "free men" to benefit from their courage.

Uh Oh here comes another lawsuit, I mean really allready, the court needs to do something about this man, and all his lawsuits, I have to wonder who is paying for all of this, someone is definitely behind him, I mean its not like they work or anything. any thoughts people, have fun and stay cool.


__________________
His Girl Thursday


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 2621
Date:
The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

Again -- where's the carpetbagger handing out the 40 acres and the mule?? Give it to him already and let him ride his own ass out of town.

So, if I understand this correctly, the old man is going to head into yet another battle - but this time in Patilla's defense ? Heh, that's something Sam might want to re-think. But then again, the two of them deserve each other. Maybe they'll be like Felix and Oscar when they share the same cell at the County. The missus might want to get her cake and file ready for the big jail-break.

(I can almost hear Nazareth playing in the background)

__________________

Stupid people piss me off !
LusOnlyVoice


Site Administrator

Status: Offline
Posts: 5099
Date:
The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

Well Girl ... I don't know if I am right or wrong here ... it's one thing for old Joe to represent himself ... but ... I don't think that he can represent Patilla ... he does not have a license to practice law ... and if he's representing someone other than himself well isn't that illegal? I'm thinking that it might be ... but then again I'm no lawyer ... what the hell do I know!

Maybe our friend Glenn could help us out with this one ... Glenn can Pilchesky legally represent Sam Patilla?

__________________

I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet.  Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
davidevans


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 82
Date:
Naughty, Naughty
Permalink  
 

Telling little white lies again LusOnly??? David

__________________
LusOnlyVoice


Site Administrator

Status: Offline
Posts: 5099
Date:
The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

What are you talking about David ... I don't have time to figure out the puzzle of you ... nor do I want to ...

__________________

I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet.  Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
IHavehadenoughofhaters


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 3414
Date:
RE: The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

sharilewis wrote:

I posted a few days ago about another big fish, tangled in Pilchesky's net. Another one of Doherty's fav's are in it. In a few days, you'll hear about it. I thought it would be a bombshell by now. Another rule breaker.


Still waiting!!!



__________________

Hey Joey?? Bite me! :))
LusOnlyVoice


Site Administrator

Status: Offline
Posts: 5099
Date:
The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

I think she was speaking about the Kenny McDowell lawsuit ... I'm not 1000% sure about that though!

__________________

I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet.  Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
Glenn Cashuric


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 505
Date:
RE: The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

Maybe our friend Glenn could help us out with this one ... Glenn can Pilchesky legally represent Sam Patilla?

Sorry I missed this earlier. No. He cannot.

I think she was speaking about the Kenny McDowell lawsuit

This is going to be an interesting one. I think Kenny's nomination is in a bit of trouble here. Of course, I was already informed that there is "no way in hell" I would get the substitution nomination, so my level of interest has been slightly dampened.

Later, all.

GC

__________________
LusOnlyVoice


Site Administrator

Status: Offline
Posts: 5099
Date:
The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

Thank you Glenn ... I didn't think that it would be legal for Joe to represent Patilla.

And Glenn a late answer is better than no answer ... Thanks again!

Oh why would you not get the substitution nomination? Just wondering

__________________

I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet.  Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
Glenn Cashuric


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 505
Date:
RE: The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

I believe that the party would (a) feel more comfortable with someone they have been associated with for a long time and (b) prefer to have someone from the city, since none of the other county candidates are Scranton-based.

There is logic in that line of reasoning, I admit.

__________________
LusOnlyVoice


Site Administrator

Status: Offline
Posts: 5099
Date:
The nets are on the boat.
Permalink  
 

Well I would think that it would go to you considering some of the votes were for you ... that's what makes more sense to me ... but what the hell do I know

__________________

I want everyone to stop and think about one thing ... Joe Pilchesky is not a lawyer ... he's just a guy playing a lawyer on the internet.  Please don't trust your legal needs to this man.
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
PilcheskyDeceit True Freedom of Speech -> True Freedom of Speech ... Pilchesky denies Freedom of Speech -> The nets are on the boat.
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard