Re: Valentine's Day
Posted by Sharon on 2/14/08
This is not a board I post on. You can look back at the history
and see that I have not been on this one for over a year. So stop
feigning ignorance. And also stop writing wild accusations based
on something you know NOTHING about. I have not failed to turn over
or withheld any documents I am required to produce... as you are
IMAGINING in your own little mind. My attorneys were late in
turning them over, as I had switched attorney. I did not pay a
sanction. So stop trying to make some big mystery or implication
that I have ANYTHING to hide out of a few lines you read on the
I am not kidding. ONE MORE of these types of false, public writings
by you and I WILL be finding out your identity. What you are
writing as you cower behind a pseudoname is potentially and legally
On 2/14/08, Mike B. wrote:
> "You are wrong with your understanding that I am withholding ANY
> documents requested of me that I am required to turn over."
> This sounds like a typical plan to not produce documents because
> you will claim some sort of privilege, like the attorney-client
> Well, they'll only motion the court to have those "privileged"
> documents reviewed "in camera" by the court. You'll spend a bunch
> of money on attorney's fees for memoranda in opposition to
> submitting the documents in camera. You'll lose that argument.
> You'll then have to produce the documents to the court, or
> possibly a special master, for their review and determination on
> Hint - just because an attorney was copied with your
> correspondence does not automatically make the document
> On 2/14/08, Sharon wrote:
>> Mike B,
>> You have reached new lows. I do not appreciate being discussed
>> on a chat board that I do not even frequent and would not have
>> known you were posting such garbage were it not specifically
>> brought to my attention.
>> You are wrong with your understanding that I am withholding ANY
>> documents requested of me that I am required to turn over. Nor
>> is Kelman requesting any such documents. WHAT IS YOUR REAL
>> IDENTITY?????????? I have had enough of you making false
>> postings of things you know nothing about in relation to my
>> litigation with VeriTox.
>> On 2/14/08, Deborah wrote:
>>> Do you really think that any statement made by Sharon
>>> regarding alteration of testimony, which the good doc did,
>>> is as important as the fact that the papers promulgated by
>>> these people caused harm by downplaying and denying mold
>>> induced illness from indoor environments?
>>> An honest question, please keep any answers or comments
>>> directed to the topic.
>>> On 2/13/08, Mike B. wrote:
>>>> Sharon is going to give Bruce Kelman a nice Valentine's
>>>> gift tomorrow - documents she's been withholding from
>>>> production. I'll bet there are some treasures amongst them!
Posts on this thread, including this one