IT SEEMS "WEASELPECKER" COLLIER COULDN'T KEEP IT IN HIS PANTS AS HE FACILITATED THE MASSIVE FRAUD SCHEME

AS NEW FACTS AND INFORMATION CONTINUE TO BUBBLE TO THE SURFACE IN THE MASSIVE FRAUD SCHEME, IN WHICH CORRUPT MEDINA COUNTY PROSECUTOR DINO HOEMAN, ILLEGITIMATE LAPDOG "JUDGE" "WEASELPECKER" COLLIER, MEDINA JAGOFF ATTORNEY LARRY COURTNEY, AND "WEASELPECKER" COLLIER'S PARAMOUR, MISTRESS, MAIN SQUEEZE, AND COURT REPORTER DONNA "HAVE IT YOUR WAY" GARRITY HAVE SO FAR BEEN IMPLICATED, NEW INFORMATION HAS COME TO THE LIGHT OF DAY.

IT APPEARS THAT LAPDOG ILLEGITIMATE "JUDGE" "WEASELPECKER" COLLIER LIKELY JUST COULD NOT KEEP IT IN HIS PANTS AS HE FACILITATED THIS MASSIVE FRAUD SCHEME UNDER THE COLOR OF HIS OFFICE.

AT THIS JUNCTURE, IT IS ONLY APPROPRIATE TO SET THE STAGE.

THE COURTS OF OHIO, EXCEPT THE COURTS IN MEDINA COUNTY, ARE GOVERNED BY RULES OF COURT, PROMULGATED BY THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO.  THE RULES OF COURT CAN BE EASILY FOUND AT THE WEBSITE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO AT http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/LegalResources/Rules/default.asp 

LOOKING NOW TO THE PROVISION OF OHIO RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, RULE 11, WE FIND THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS, EXCERPTED BELOW:

RULE 11. Signing of Pleadings, Motions, or Other Documents

Every pleading, motion, or other document of a party represented by an attorney shall be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney's individual name, whose address, attorney registration number, telephone number, facsimile number, if any, and business e-mail address, if any, shall be stated. . . .If a document is not signed or is signed with intent to defeat the purpose of this rule, it may be stricken as sham and false and the action may proceed as though the document had not been served. For a willful violation of this rule, an attorney or pro se party, upon motion of a party or upon the court's own motion, may be subjected to appropriate action, including an award to the opposing party of expenses and reasonable attorney fees incurred in bringing any motion under this rule.

SO WE FIND, UNDER THE SUPREME COURT'S RULES THAT "EVERY DOCUMENT FILED BY AN ATTORNEY SHALL (MUST) BE SIGNED."  ANY UNSIGNED DOCUMENT MAY BE STRICKEN AS "SHAM AND FALSE."  MOREOVER, AN ATTORNEY WHO FILES AN UNSIGNED DOCUMENT "MAY BE SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATE ACTION (SANCTION)."  Please see prior post at this blog captioned LAPDOG COLLIER ROBS ANOTHER GRAVE !! easily found at http://medinacorruption.blogspot.com/2014/10/lapdog-collier-robs-another-grave.html

NOW IS THE TIME TO TAKE A LOOK AT ANOTHER ONE OF "WEASELPECKER" COLLIER'S RULINGS, WHICH FACILITATED THE MASSIVE FRAUD SCHEME :

READERS SHOULD TAKE PARTICULAR NOTE OF ITEM #4 OF "WEASELPECKER" COLLIER'S JOURNAL ENTRY. "UNFORTUNATELY, EXHIBIT A WAS INADVERTENTLY NEVER ATTACHED TO THE MARCH 13, 2009 JUDGMENT ENTRY."

PREDICTABLY, THIS CLAIM IS NOT TRUE, NOT SURPRISINGLY GIVEN "WEASELPECKER'S" COMPLETE LACK OF CHARACTER AND INTEGRITY.

NEXT  WE TURN TO THE SIGNATURE PAGE OF EXHIBIT "A" THAT "WEASELPECKER" DISINGENUOUSLY CLAIMS WAS "INADVERTENTLY NEVER ATTACHED" TO HIS PRIOR UNLAWFUL MARCH 13, 2009 JUDGMENT ENTRY AS THE PLOT THICKENS:

READERS CAN CLEARLY SEE THAT THERE ARE NO SIGNATURES ON THIS DOCUMENT, A CLEAR VIOLATION OF THE OHIO RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, RULE 11.  "WEASELPECKER" COLLIER HAS ABSOLUTELY NO REGARD FOR THE RULES OF COURT.  THIS IS WHAT YOU GET WHEN YOU, THE CITIZENS ARE DEPRIVED OF YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO VOTE THIS CORRUPT MORON OUT OF OFFICE BY THE MEDINA COUNTY REPUBLICRAT PARTY.

HERE IS WHERE THE PLOT THICKENS. 

NOW, READERS SHOULD BE AWARE THAT "WEASELPECKER" COLLIER HAS BOTH A SECOND WIFE TUCKED SAFELY AT HOME WITH HIS LONGSTANDING PARAMOUR, MISTRESS, MAIN SQUEEZE, AND COURT REPORTER DONNA "HAVE IT YOUR WAY" GARRITY ON THE SIDE.  APPARENTLY THIS WAS NOT ENOUGH FOR "WEASELPECKER" COLLIER.

THE BLOGGER HAS BEEN INFORMED THAT ONE OF THE ATTORNEYS INVOLVED IN THIS CASE WAS A VERY ATTRACTIVE YOUNG FEMALE ATTORNEY WHO HAD A PENCHANT FOR DRESSING WITH EXTREMELY SHORT MINI-SKIRTS, MUCH LIKE A HOOKER.  THIS YOUNG ATTORNEY APPARENTLY APPEALED TO "WEASELPECKER'S" PRURIENT INTEREST.

ARE YOU, THE READERS, BEGINNING TO GET THE DRIFT?

THE STORY GOES THAT THIS YOUNG FEMALE ATTORNEY MAILED EXHIBIT"A" TO "WEASELPECKER" WHO DECIDED TO UNLAWFULLY "ATTACH" THE EX PARTE EXHIBIT "A" TO HIS JUDGMENT ENTRY WITHOUT A HEARING AND DEPRIVING THE VICTIMS OF THE MASSIVE FRAUD SCHEME TO OBJECT OR OTHERWISE CHALLENGE THE ENTRY, ONE MORE VIOLATION OF THE RULES OF COURT.

WHY, MIGHT YOU ASK, WOULD "WEASELPECKER" COLLIER SO FLAGRANTLY VIOLATE THE RULES OF COURT PROMULGATED BY THE SUPREME COURT? ASIDE FROM THE OBVIOUS THAT "WEASELPECKER" NEVER ABIDES BY THE RULES OF COURT,, OR THE LAW FOR THAT MATTER, READERS CAN BET DOLLARS TO DONUTS THAT "WEASELPECKER" DID THIS "FAVOR" FOR THIS YOUNG FEMALE ATTORNEY, IN EXCHANGE FOR WHICH HE WAS EXPECTING A ROLL IN THE HAY WITH THIS YOUNG GIRL.

IT REMAINS UNKNOWN WHETHER "WEASELPECKER" ACCOMPLISHED HIS OBJECTIVE WITH THE ATTRACTIVE YOUNG ATTORNEY,  BUT HE LATER RECUSED HIMSELF FROM THE CASE "TO AVOID THE APPEARANCE OF FURTHER IMPROPRIETY."

THIS JUST GOES TO SHOW THAT "WEASELPECKER" COLLIER "THINKS," FOR WANT OF A MORE APPROPRIATE TERM, WITH THE WRONG "HEAD!"