Lawyer Conspiracy In Small Town U.S.A.-Part III-Collaboration-Must Read
Harsha Sankar
Virginia
Dear Fellow American, March 2005
I write this last letter about my legal matter that was concluded nearly seven years ago. What compels me to write, after all these years, is I never detailed the actions of one of the main co-conspirators and chief beneficiary of this travesty of justice, Maria Ellis.
People tend to solely blame the legal profession for the woes and excesses of the legal system. However, the bar associations cannot and would not be successful in gaining an undue and immoral control of government and society without a supporting cast. In Germany, a fringe party composed of extremists and bigots known as the Nazis, would not have risen to power if there had not been collaboration from the military, the financial markets, the farmers, the medical profession, the industrial sector, many small businesses, and a significant minority of apolitical Germans. The Nazi Party divided and conquered by whipping up hysteria and emotions. They seduced people by convincing them they were victims and that they were entitled to material benefits. It is amazing how people refused to think logically when they were afforded privileges.
Tens of millions of Americans, such as Maria Ellis, have deluded themselves that they are entitled to some things simply because they received it “legally”. Legal notwithstanding, people have the ultimate responsibility to consider whether their actions are moral and of common sense. That is why I detest Maria Ellis’eager participation in conspiring with the ruling elite to condemn me with such viciousness and malice in order to steal massive amounts of money from me. While no one is a saint, for any individual(s) to arrogate to oneself the self-righteousness and moral authority to condemn others on a personal level is simply not normal in a free and democratic nation.
Obviously no one cares and asks to be summoned to court for something he, she, or a family member did not do. My question is the same as it was in 1996 “What did it cost her to attend a closed court session for a $5.00 shoplifting incident I had sworn at the time her son committed?” Reasonable counsel’s fees, based on $100.00 per hour of focused, concentrated and good faith time, should not have exceeded $150.00-$175.00. Add at most an hour and a half of her time with possible loss of income, the total loss is a grand total of $200.00. Yet she seeks damages from the heavy hand of the imperial attorney-monopolized judiciary for $200,000.00, which is one thousand times her maximum economic loss. After her lawyer filed suit on her behalf seeking an additional $200,000.00, she “settles” for one half to two thirds of $85,309.40 (judgment plus interest). Not a bad investment for $175.00, if that, and 90 minutes, if that, of her time.
If an individual has a legitimate grievance, then the remedy or redress must be legitimate, reasonable, appropriate,proportionately just, and time-honored. All have the obligation to be objective and not give in or embrace reactionary, vigilante, irrational, and greedy instincts. Simply because someone makes another individual angry and offends him or her does not give the individual the right to react with such overzealousness. Simply put, no one should sue for property(money is property) over hurt feelings. If I sued over everyone who upset me, I would be in court non-stop for the next millennium trying to take their property. While I have had my fair share of disputes with people throughout the years, I do my best to stick to the relevant issues. I do not cite personal and other irrelevant information. I do this not out of altruism or not because I claim to have higher morals than the average individual, which I do not have. I stay focused on the related specifics due to the fact I do not want to perceived as not having a legitimate claim/defense. Smear tactics are used to discount the merits and most realize this.
Incidentally, during the 20 minute shoplifting trial, she adamantly stated, when asked, that her son was a good kid. How can an adult rationally tell oneself that this question is appropriate?
From the very beginning I offered to take a lie detector test to prove my innocence. This entails being picked up in a police vehicle, escorted to Salem, taking the comprehensive polygraph test, and brought back to Covington via police transport. This would have cost my business four hours of my time. Would that not have been enough to appease Maria Ellis? Apparently not, as a new holder of “victim” status, she sought and stole an astronomical amount of money simply because I accused her son of stealing $5.00 in products. Because I accused, either mistakenly or intentionally, her son of shoplifting two wine bottles, she, through counsel, purposely degraded and belittled me as a person and business owner. In order for her to “cash” in, I as a defendant in a civil lawsuit would have to be demonized and significantly reduced in the eyes of the jury and community if her lawyer, on her behalf and for her benefit, is to be successful in extorting and extracting a huge sum of valuable resources from me. She would also have to find out irrelevant and highly confidential financial information so again she could take the maximum amount possible.
If she honestly thought, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that I had not told the whole truth when I issued sworn statements that implicated R.M. Ellis, Jr., she should have urged the Commonwealth’s Attorney to prosecute me for perjury and/or filing a false police report. There simply is no excuse for this gold-digging shysterism.
Well after the lawsuit was filed and as possible jail time was imminent, I spoke to a mutual friend of the Ellises and mine, Tim Reedy. He told me he had tried to talk to the now deceased Randolph M. Ellis Sr. out of pursuing such an ugly, underhanded, and uncivil matter but received no response. While Maria Ellis’ and her lawyer’s motive behind their demand of all financial data were obvious, I asked Tim Reedy what is it with these very personal questions over a matter that may have happened over a decade ago(at a certain highly private setting) that I found very perturbing, insulting, and offensive? It had no bearing on the review and reporting of a shoplifting incident. His reply was “Without that, they would not have a case”. I found that revealing and also disturbing.
Even if that personal and confidential matter took place ten days instead of ten years prior to the reporting of the theft, it would still be irrelevant because only actions are to be judged and individuals are never to be branded. It still would not be the concern nor business of Maria Ellis. Even if what had happened in the mid 80’s had not been slanderous, it still would not have had been the concern nor business of Maria Ellis, regardless of what renegade jurists had instructed her.
What I found remarkable is she, through her lawyer, never asked the following fundamental questions?
1. Why did the Commonwealth Attorney’s Office not review the tape with me of the particular incident after they reviewed it with her, her son, and her husband?
2. Why did it take three months for me to receive the tape after her son was declared innocent?
3. Why was I not notified of her son’s innocence by the prosecutor?
4. What was the definition of the monitor in which I reviewed the shoplifting incident?
My time-lapse recording system’s monitor obviously provides more clarity than the average TV set.
5. What speed did I watch the shoplifting incident? With a regular VCR she watched the tape at regular speed. On a time-lapse recorder, I was able to review the incident at one-third the regular speed.
6. Why should I be held liable for damages, despite no proof of damages, when I have no authority to prosecute and did not? One answer is the Commonwealth Attorney’s Office has immunity to civil lawsuits so the Plaintiff chose to seize money where she could.
7. How many bottles of wine does it take to obtain a gross profit of $200,000.00?
8. Who wants their business to be victimized by shoplifting?
9. Why did the prosecutor not review or have a police officer review the tape before the trial? There were no eyewitnesses as the tape was the sole piece of evidence.
Apparently she did not want answers to these questions.As I have already explained in my last letter released for circulation two years ago (on my own terms) in regards to personal information, I was the recipient of severe endangerment, psychotropic poisoning, emotional abuse, torment, and defamation by a certain doctor in 1986. What is done is done and it cannot be undone. This also begs the question “What ethical psychotherapist writes notes about
a patient/client for a third-party to read?” However, when Dr. and Mrs. Sankar (father & mother) were subpoenaed, she wanted questions about my finances and personal life to be answered. Apparently with lottery-style money on the brain, she never gave this any thought.
While neither parent had any knowledge about the Quikster Food Mart, the fact they were forced to appear for a deposition to see if they would provide any negative and incriminating personal information about me is indecent and shameless. For anyone to attempt to take advantage of any possible family friction (past or present) in order to embarrass and mortify even an opposing litigant is malicious and vicious. Lies, in her presence and with her knowledge, were told to both parents. I never stalked her son and I never stared at him at a football game. As I had cited back then, why would I have anything against a minor who was seemingly caught in the crossfire?
While I am not claiming to be to be highly principled, there has to be a certain level of integrity, social conscience, and moral restraint in how we try to resolve differences. Anyone who exploits the force of law for material benefit is simply feeding the monster of absolutism and demagoguery. Totalitarianism rears its ugly head only when the values of the rank-and-file have been corrupted. Tyranny reigns supreme as rights are reduced to privileges and everyone struggles to climb that ladder of aristocratic hierarchy and join the ranks of the upper echelons of society. The only way to survive in this society is to thrive in a dog-eat-dog atmosphere.
As I have already stated, even if I had falsely (instead of mistakenly as I have always asserted after careful review of the tape on the second occasion) her son of stealing wine bottles, that does not legitimize her successful attempt in stealing $85,309.40. Even if she had that belief, she could have returned her percentage of the judgment ($43K-$57K). I had already spent 64 days in jail. If I did the crime, I most certainly did the time. The Quikster Food Mart (my business) had already lost a significant amount of money while I was in custody. Bearing her legal costs was tremendous. Add that she knew that then Commonwealth Attorney J.C. Alderson lied in a newspaper article deeming the race, sex, and general age of the actual shoplifter could not be determined by the review of the videotape. Yet that thought of returning money never even crossed her mind. The ends justified the means.
Since these events and abuses have become so commonplace and widespread, people like M. Ellis feel this is normal and she was deserving of this. The intent of this letter is to burst the bubble of this virtual reality matrix. We as citizens need to take the blue pill as Keanu Reeves did and start thinking for ourselves. The handling of this matter and its results are grotesque, abnormal, dysfunctional, and repugnant to the ideals of basic freedoms. As so many have stated “Liberty contracts when government expands”.
There are 100’s of reasons for Maria Ellis to rationalize this monumental theft. I have heard it all before and I refuse to go there. It is also beneath the reader’s dignity to read these reasons. Few months after I had been released from jail and was appealing the trial court’s verdict to the Virginia Supreme Court, I had heard a rumor that R.M. Ellis, Jr. was boasting to his friends about all the money he would receive. I did not attach much veracity to that until December, 1997. The day I was notified my appeal was rejected by the State Supreme Court, I went to see a movie (Scream 2) in Covington. As I walking to the theatres, I noticed at least three or four teenagers (who happened to be of the same race as the civil suit plaintiff) smiling directly at me. While I am not making any certain claims, I could not help but think a few days later that the story of boasting may indeed be true. All I will write now is exploitation of an arbitrary and corrupt legal system is nothing one should brag about and be proud.
Our country is in the grip of hedonism and materialism. The majority of Americans are growing weary of this absence of principles and standards as they just want the Law to return to its simple, predictable, and limited form. In the name of justice, law and order, the legal profession has re-established the citizen’s way of life as a zero-sum man-eating flesh game. This breeds the dangerous “philosophy of entitlement” and the fearful “cult of personalities”. Instead, we should go back to the days of mutual reciprocity, simple honesty, and trust in which merits as recognized by society are rewarded and stray away from the seductions of legal activism.
As one freedom fighter noted “America is great because Americans are good. Once Americans cease to be good, America will cease to be great.” Ladies, gentlemen, and other concerned citizens, we have reached that point. Forget the war in the Middle East. We the People, the citizenry, are fighting a war on our soil on a much grander scale on an everyday basis. What happened to me has happened to at least 150 million other Americans in some shape or form. Some have been persecuted to a far greater extent. More have suffered to a lesser degree and many of those are not even aware of this. The most obvious symptom, aside from extremely high lawyer fees, is the fact our healthcare, education, and regulatory systems are holding the average American hostage for a huge sum of ransom. To borrow loosely from Indian freedom fighter M.Gandhi, we have enough for everyone’s need but not nearly enough for everyone’s greed.
I certainly hope these next few statements are not perceived as a personal attack. I could not help but note at that time that M. Ellis was a preacher of Christianity in a house of worship. Even though I am a Hindu, I definitely saw the contradictions and hypocrisy. I started to read the King James version of the Holy Bible for insight. As I understand it, did not Jesus warn people to not stay away from temptation? Was this not how Adam and Eve met their fall? Did not Jesus warn against lawyers, high priests and pharisees and that people should not afford them blind obedience? Did not Jesus denounce “Gatekeepers” and establish a philosophy that God listens to all and that everyone should have a personal relationship with Him. Did not Jesus throw a fit when he saw a house of God prostituted for mercantile means and denounce such practice? Did not Jesus preach empathy as he urged others to love thy neighbor and fellow man? Yet our halls of law, liberties and justice, taken over by the bar associations without a shot being fired, has been defiled in such fashion. While I do not subscribe to Jesus as savior, I certainly embrace many of his ideals and messages. He certainly preached that people must prioritize the triumph of morality over the triumph of might and victory. Jesus of Nazareth apparently practiced it too. He could have easily saved himself from an excruciating crucifixion and by living achieved more success in developing a much bigger following.
It seems that many appear to saturate themselves in Christianity as a rock that has been in the oceans for thousands of years. However the inner core of the rock is dry when split into two. So is the inner core of the souls of many professed “believers” who in actuality allow the “golden calf” precede in importance above all values.
At the end of the day, her lawyer will just state that he served his client to the best of his ability in a cost-effective manner. While this is a lame excuse because this legal action was a trumped up SLAPP( Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation), it certainly is not totally meritless. Again I borrow from Christianity when I write, as I understand it, Satan has no internal power. His power comes from those who co-operate. Only the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit can generate power and sustenance for those who wish to tap it. Another analogy that can be used is a virus cannot sustain itself. It must feed on other organisms if it is to be viable. If people, not just in America but throughout the world, would just non-comply with forces of darkness, the apparatuses of tyranny, autocracies, and subjugation would literally disappear overnight. This is why I undertook an extensive letter-writing, internet communication, and distribution campaign. I knew the majority of average Americans such as myself could see through this warped and twisted sense of justice that our legal system has too often adapted.
On a personal note, I am condemned to struggle as I cannot own a conventional retail/service business that has visible assets and still continue to exercise my freedom of speech and press. Needless to write the last seven years my income derived from my wholesale/direct marketing company has not even reached subsistent levels. The legal and regulatory systems, controlled by the bar associations, has already enticed one individual (Oliver “Butch” Reid”) to defraud and cheat me out of a significant amount of money. To summarize, he expressed his auction company should get over $18,400.00 for the container of handicrafts, rosewood and teakwood items and furniture that had just arrived on American soil. The auction netted less than $2,900.00. He in turn received a sizable commission. However, what made me condemn his morals and ethics is he had at least one individual (Bill Snyder) buy secretly for him. I have the pictures of my products taken in both India and later in his old store in Covington as well as the bidder and buying lists to prove this. Yet the Auctioneer’s Board dismissed my case without any objective review of the specific and relevant facts. Reid made the same personal and slanderous attacks against me, as his defense, as was made against me by Maria Ellis and her lawyer.
Fortunately the vast majority of auctioneers, salespeople, customers, and independent contractors have been very reasonable and fair with me.
Economic impoverishment is the one of the worst crimes that can be inflicted on an individual. Economic deprivation is the worst form of imprisonment.
I swear the preceding is true on March 16th, 2005
Very Truly Yours,
Harsha Sankar
908 Valley Ridge Road
Covington, Virginia 24426
Virginia
Dear Fellow American, March 2005
I write this last letter about my legal matter that was concluded nearly seven years ago. What compels me to write, after all these years, is I never detailed the actions of one of the main co-conspirators and chief beneficiary of this travesty of justice, Maria Ellis.
People tend to solely blame the legal profession for the woes and excesses of the legal system. However, the bar associations cannot and would not be successful in gaining an undue and immoral control of government and society without a supporting cast. In Germany, a fringe party composed of extremists and bigots known as the Nazis, would not have risen to power if there had not been collaboration from the military, the financial markets, the farmers, the medical profession, the industrial sector, many small businesses, and a significant minority of apolitical Germans. The Nazi Party divided and conquered by whipping up hysteria and emotions. They seduced people by convincing them they were victims and that they were entitled to material benefits. It is amazing how people refused to think logically when they were afforded privileges.
Tens of millions of Americans, such as Maria Ellis, have deluded themselves that they are entitled to some things simply because they received it “legally”. Legal notwithstanding, people have the ultimate responsibility to consider whether their actions are moral and of common sense. That is why I detest Maria Ellis’eager participation in conspiring with the ruling elite to condemn me with such viciousness and malice in order to steal massive amounts of money from me. While no one is a saint, for any individual(s) to arrogate to oneself the self-righteousness and moral authority to condemn others on a personal level is simply not normal in a free and democratic nation.
Obviously no one cares and asks to be summoned to court for something he, she, or a family member did not do. My question is the same as it was in 1996 “What did it cost her to attend a closed court session for a $5.00 shoplifting incident I had sworn at the time her son committed?” Reasonable counsel’s fees, based on $100.00 per hour of focused, concentrated and good faith time, should not have exceeded $150.00-$175.00. Add at most an hour and a half of her time with possible loss of income, the total loss is a grand total of $200.00. Yet she seeks damages from the heavy hand of the imperial attorney-monopolized judiciary for $200,000.00, which is one thousand times her maximum economic loss. After her lawyer filed suit on her behalf seeking an additional $200,000.00, she “settles” for one half to two thirds of $85,309.40 (judgment plus interest). Not a bad investment for $175.00, if that, and 90 minutes, if that, of her time.
If an individual has a legitimate grievance, then the remedy or redress must be legitimate, reasonable, appropriate,proportionately just, and time-honored. All have the obligation to be objective and not give in or embrace reactionary, vigilante, irrational, and greedy instincts. Simply because someone makes another individual angry and offends him or her does not give the individual the right to react with such overzealousness. Simply put, no one should sue for property(money is property) over hurt feelings. If I sued over everyone who upset me, I would be in court non-stop for the next millennium trying to take their property. While I have had my fair share of disputes with people throughout the years, I do my best to stick to the relevant issues. I do not cite personal and other irrelevant information. I do this not out of altruism or not because I claim to have higher morals than the average individual, which I do not have. I stay focused on the related specifics due to the fact I do not want to perceived as not having a legitimate claim/defense. Smear tactics are used to discount the merits and most realize this.
Incidentally, during the 20 minute shoplifting trial, she adamantly stated, when asked, that her son was a good kid. How can an adult rationally tell oneself that this question is appropriate?
From the very beginning I offered to take a lie detector test to prove my innocence. This entails being picked up in a police vehicle, escorted to Salem, taking the comprehensive polygraph test, and brought back to Covington via police transport. This would have cost my business four hours of my time. Would that not have been enough to appease Maria Ellis? Apparently not, as a new holder of “victim” status, she sought and stole an astronomical amount of money simply because I accused her son of stealing $5.00 in products. Because I accused, either mistakenly or intentionally, her son of shoplifting two wine bottles, she, through counsel, purposely degraded and belittled me as a person and business owner. In order for her to “cash” in, I as a defendant in a civil lawsuit would have to be demonized and significantly reduced in the eyes of the jury and community if her lawyer, on her behalf and for her benefit, is to be successful in extorting and extracting a huge sum of valuable resources from me. She would also have to find out irrelevant and highly confidential financial information so again she could take the maximum amount possible.
If she honestly thought, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that I had not told the whole truth when I issued sworn statements that implicated R.M. Ellis, Jr., she should have urged the Commonwealth’s Attorney to prosecute me for perjury and/or filing a false police report. There simply is no excuse for this gold-digging shysterism.
Well after the lawsuit was filed and as possible jail time was imminent, I spoke to a mutual friend of the Ellises and mine, Tim Reedy. He told me he had tried to talk to the now deceased Randolph M. Ellis Sr. out of pursuing such an ugly, underhanded, and uncivil matter but received no response. While Maria Ellis’ and her lawyer’s motive behind their demand of all financial data were obvious, I asked Tim Reedy what is it with these very personal questions over a matter that may have happened over a decade ago(at a certain highly private setting) that I found very perturbing, insulting, and offensive? It had no bearing on the review and reporting of a shoplifting incident. His reply was “Without that, they would not have a case”. I found that revealing and also disturbing.
Even if that personal and confidential matter took place ten days instead of ten years prior to the reporting of the theft, it would still be irrelevant because only actions are to be judged and individuals are never to be branded. It still would not be the concern nor business of Maria Ellis. Even if what had happened in the mid 80’s had not been slanderous, it still would not have had been the concern nor business of Maria Ellis, regardless of what renegade jurists had instructed her.
What I found remarkable is she, through her lawyer, never asked the following fundamental questions?
1. Why did the Commonwealth Attorney’s Office not review the tape with me of the particular incident after they reviewed it with her, her son, and her husband?
2. Why did it take three months for me to receive the tape after her son was declared innocent?
3. Why was I not notified of her son’s innocence by the prosecutor?
4. What was the definition of the monitor in which I reviewed the shoplifting incident?
My time-lapse recording system’s monitor obviously provides more clarity than the average TV set.
5. What speed did I watch the shoplifting incident? With a regular VCR she watched the tape at regular speed. On a time-lapse recorder, I was able to review the incident at one-third the regular speed.
6. Why should I be held liable for damages, despite no proof of damages, when I have no authority to prosecute and did not? One answer is the Commonwealth Attorney’s Office has immunity to civil lawsuits so the Plaintiff chose to seize money where she could.
7. How many bottles of wine does it take to obtain a gross profit of $200,000.00?
8. Who wants their business to be victimized by shoplifting?
9. Why did the prosecutor not review or have a police officer review the tape before the trial? There were no eyewitnesses as the tape was the sole piece of evidence.
Apparently she did not want answers to these questions.As I have already explained in my last letter released for circulation two years ago (on my own terms) in regards to personal information, I was the recipient of severe endangerment, psychotropic poisoning, emotional abuse, torment, and defamation by a certain doctor in 1986. What is done is done and it cannot be undone. This also begs the question “What ethical psychotherapist writes notes about
a patient/client for a third-party to read?” However, when Dr. and Mrs. Sankar (father & mother) were subpoenaed, she wanted questions about my finances and personal life to be answered. Apparently with lottery-style money on the brain, she never gave this any thought.
While neither parent had any knowledge about the Quikster Food Mart, the fact they were forced to appear for a deposition to see if they would provide any negative and incriminating personal information about me is indecent and shameless. For anyone to attempt to take advantage of any possible family friction (past or present) in order to embarrass and mortify even an opposing litigant is malicious and vicious. Lies, in her presence and with her knowledge, were told to both parents. I never stalked her son and I never stared at him at a football game. As I had cited back then, why would I have anything against a minor who was seemingly caught in the crossfire?
While I am not claiming to be to be highly principled, there has to be a certain level of integrity, social conscience, and moral restraint in how we try to resolve differences. Anyone who exploits the force of law for material benefit is simply feeding the monster of absolutism and demagoguery. Totalitarianism rears its ugly head only when the values of the rank-and-file have been corrupted. Tyranny reigns supreme as rights are reduced to privileges and everyone struggles to climb that ladder of aristocratic hierarchy and join the ranks of the upper echelons of society. The only way to survive in this society is to thrive in a dog-eat-dog atmosphere.
As I have already stated, even if I had falsely (instead of mistakenly as I have always asserted after careful review of the tape on the second occasion) her son of stealing wine bottles, that does not legitimize her successful attempt in stealing $85,309.40. Even if she had that belief, she could have returned her percentage of the judgment ($43K-$57K). I had already spent 64 days in jail. If I did the crime, I most certainly did the time. The Quikster Food Mart (my business) had already lost a significant amount of money while I was in custody. Bearing her legal costs was tremendous. Add that she knew that then Commonwealth Attorney J.C. Alderson lied in a newspaper article deeming the race, sex, and general age of the actual shoplifter could not be determined by the review of the videotape. Yet that thought of returning money never even crossed her mind. The ends justified the means.
Since these events and abuses have become so commonplace and widespread, people like M. Ellis feel this is normal and she was deserving of this. The intent of this letter is to burst the bubble of this virtual reality matrix. We as citizens need to take the blue pill as Keanu Reeves did and start thinking for ourselves. The handling of this matter and its results are grotesque, abnormal, dysfunctional, and repugnant to the ideals of basic freedoms. As so many have stated “Liberty contracts when government expands”.
There are 100’s of reasons for Maria Ellis to rationalize this monumental theft. I have heard it all before and I refuse to go there. It is also beneath the reader’s dignity to read these reasons. Few months after I had been released from jail and was appealing the trial court’s verdict to the Virginia Supreme Court, I had heard a rumor that R.M. Ellis, Jr. was boasting to his friends about all the money he would receive. I did not attach much veracity to that until December, 1997. The day I was notified my appeal was rejected by the State Supreme Court, I went to see a movie (Scream 2) in Covington. As I walking to the theatres, I noticed at least three or four teenagers (who happened to be of the same race as the civil suit plaintiff) smiling directly at me. While I am not making any certain claims, I could not help but think a few days later that the story of boasting may indeed be true. All I will write now is exploitation of an arbitrary and corrupt legal system is nothing one should brag about and be proud.
Our country is in the grip of hedonism and materialism. The majority of Americans are growing weary of this absence of principles and standards as they just want the Law to return to its simple, predictable, and limited form. In the name of justice, law and order, the legal profession has re-established the citizen’s way of life as a zero-sum man-eating flesh game. This breeds the dangerous “philosophy of entitlement” and the fearful “cult of personalities”. Instead, we should go back to the days of mutual reciprocity, simple honesty, and trust in which merits as recognized by society are rewarded and stray away from the seductions of legal activism.
As one freedom fighter noted “America is great because Americans are good. Once Americans cease to be good, America will cease to be great.” Ladies, gentlemen, and other concerned citizens, we have reached that point. Forget the war in the Middle East. We the People, the citizenry, are fighting a war on our soil on a much grander scale on an everyday basis. What happened to me has happened to at least 150 million other Americans in some shape or form. Some have been persecuted to a far greater extent. More have suffered to a lesser degree and many of those are not even aware of this. The most obvious symptom, aside from extremely high lawyer fees, is the fact our healthcare, education, and regulatory systems are holding the average American hostage for a huge sum of ransom. To borrow loosely from Indian freedom fighter M.Gandhi, we have enough for everyone’s need but not nearly enough for everyone’s greed.
I certainly hope these next few statements are not perceived as a personal attack. I could not help but note at that time that M. Ellis was a preacher of Christianity in a house of worship. Even though I am a Hindu, I definitely saw the contradictions and hypocrisy. I started to read the King James version of the Holy Bible for insight. As I understand it, did not Jesus warn people to not stay away from temptation? Was this not how Adam and Eve met their fall? Did not Jesus warn against lawyers, high priests and pharisees and that people should not afford them blind obedience? Did not Jesus denounce “Gatekeepers” and establish a philosophy that God listens to all and that everyone should have a personal relationship with Him. Did not Jesus throw a fit when he saw a house of God prostituted for mercantile means and denounce such practice? Did not Jesus preach empathy as he urged others to love thy neighbor and fellow man? Yet our halls of law, liberties and justice, taken over by the bar associations without a shot being fired, has been defiled in such fashion. While I do not subscribe to Jesus as savior, I certainly embrace many of his ideals and messages. He certainly preached that people must prioritize the triumph of morality over the triumph of might and victory. Jesus of Nazareth apparently practiced it too. He could have easily saved himself from an excruciating crucifixion and by living achieved more success in developing a much bigger following.
It seems that many appear to saturate themselves in Christianity as a rock that has been in the oceans for thousands of years. However the inner core of the rock is dry when split into two. So is the inner core of the souls of many professed “believers” who in actuality allow the “golden calf” precede in importance above all values.
At the end of the day, her lawyer will just state that he served his client to the best of his ability in a cost-effective manner. While this is a lame excuse because this legal action was a trumped up SLAPP( Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation), it certainly is not totally meritless. Again I borrow from Christianity when I write, as I understand it, Satan has no internal power. His power comes from those who co-operate. Only the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit can generate power and sustenance for those who wish to tap it. Another analogy that can be used is a virus cannot sustain itself. It must feed on other organisms if it is to be viable. If people, not just in America but throughout the world, would just non-comply with forces of darkness, the apparatuses of tyranny, autocracies, and subjugation would literally disappear overnight. This is why I undertook an extensive letter-writing, internet communication, and distribution campaign. I knew the majority of average Americans such as myself could see through this warped and twisted sense of justice that our legal system has too often adapted.
On a personal note, I am condemned to struggle as I cannot own a conventional retail/service business that has visible assets and still continue to exercise my freedom of speech and press. Needless to write the last seven years my income derived from my wholesale/direct marketing company has not even reached subsistent levels. The legal and regulatory systems, controlled by the bar associations, has already enticed one individual (Oliver “Butch” Reid”) to defraud and cheat me out of a significant amount of money. To summarize, he expressed his auction company should get over $18,400.00 for the container of handicrafts, rosewood and teakwood items and furniture that had just arrived on American soil. The auction netted less than $2,900.00. He in turn received a sizable commission. However, what made me condemn his morals and ethics is he had at least one individual (Bill Snyder) buy secretly for him. I have the pictures of my products taken in both India and later in his old store in Covington as well as the bidder and buying lists to prove this. Yet the Auctioneer’s Board dismissed my case without any objective review of the specific and relevant facts. Reid made the same personal and slanderous attacks against me, as his defense, as was made against me by Maria Ellis and her lawyer.
Fortunately the vast majority of auctioneers, salespeople, customers, and independent contractors have been very reasonable and fair with me.
Economic impoverishment is the one of the worst crimes that can be inflicted on an individual. Economic deprivation is the worst form of imprisonment.
I swear the preceding is true on March 16th, 2005
Very Truly Yours,
Harsha Sankar
908 Valley Ridge Road
Covington, Virginia 24426
posted by Harsha Sankar at 11:06 PM
0 comments
