Thursday, December 6, 2018

The Constant Whiner, by Anne Berg

[Vote for your favorite sobriquet in the comments!--ed.]

There is a great movie from 2005 titled The Constant Gardener. A movie should be made about Leonard Pozner:  The Constant Whiner - Lennie the Chin

http://floridapolitics.com/archives/277383-sandy-hook-father-lenny-pozner-sues-delray-beach  

October 12, 2018, 8:00 am:
"As a direct and proximate result of the City’s violation of Mr. Pozner’s rights as described in this Count, he has been injured and has suffered damages, including pain and suffering, mental anguish and emotional distress, economic damages, and loss of capacity to enjoy life,” Pozner's attorney Mark Tietig wrote in that suit.

James Fetzer:
"Lenny, whose real name appears to be Reuben Vabner, is suing me, my series editor, Mike Palecek, and Moon Rock Books for defamation, his ultimate goal being to shut down our ability to publish and to stifle free speech."

Well, it's kind of hard to defame a faceless, soulless, heartless non entity like Lenny.  What claim to fame does Lenny have to begin with?  Father of a child killed twice on continents apart.  Not many can make that claim so perhaps Lenny does have a valid case.  He is famous all right like his brethren in the firm except they were not, and are not, afraid to show their mugs in public. Nor did they ever file suits for defamation.  That would've been a hoot.  Imagine Meyer Lansky and Bugsy Siegel suing someone for defamation!  Lenny, the agency created mobster, needs a nickname like those given great mobsters from the past. Here are some suggestions:

Lennie the Lump named after famed gangster Louie the Lump (Louis Pioggi) may be a good one

Or Lennie the Face, since he has none

Lennie the Typewriter fits too, named after Chuckie the Typewriter (Charles Nicoletti)

Lennie the Gaspipe is another one, belonged to Tony the Gaspipe (Anthony Casso)

And why not Lead Pipe Lennie after Lead Pipe Joe (Joseph Todaro Sr.)

Cousin Lennie is soothing, almost like Cousin Eddie (Eddie Garafola)

Lennie the Fixer is almost as good as Charlie the Fixer (Charles Fischetti)

Lennie from Brooklyn fills in for George from Canada (Gerlando Sciascia)

Lennie the Shadow looks as good as Ferdi the Shadow (Ferdinand Boccia)

Lennie the Weasel competes with Jimmy the Weasel (Aladino "Jimmy" Fratianno)

Lennie the Undertaker gets the baton from Don Stefano the Undertaker (Stefano Magaddino)

Last but not least, Lennie the Oddfather, a play off Vinnie the Oddfather (Vincent Gigante)

Vinnie was at other times called Vinnie the Chin and now we have Lennie the Chin

Lennie the Chin

Lenny Pozner



79 best images about Mobs_Los Angeles on Pinterest ...




Louie the Lump was a member of the Five Points Gang in ...


Anthony Casso | "Gaspipe" - YouTube


Crime And InvestigationAnthony Casso - Mafia Wiki

https://www.nationalcrimesyndicate.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/mom.png


Vincent The Chin Gigante Documentary - The Oddfather ...

 Charles Nicoletti | Mafia Wiki | Fandom powered by Wikia17 Best images about Ross Stanger/Chicago Outfit on ...

 Sinatra en de Mafia | Berichten uit het verleden
   https://i.pinimg.com/736x/a3/c0/c5/a3c0c57365e7004d24d6a7e91a3468f4.jpg
Joe Todaro Sr. aka "Lead Pipe Joe"
 Image result for Antonino Magaddino
 Image result for gerlando sciascia

Wednesday, September 5, 2018

The Chimera Lenny Pozner

It is time the world knew what happened when Leonard Pozner sued Wolfgang Halbig, since the proceedings support the conclusion of many in the Sandy Hook Truth community that Lenny may not even be a real person, at all, but is somebody's cyberpuppet.  In a nutshell, Pozner never appeared for a single hearing in the case, not even for his deposition when--after numerous delays--the court ordered him to submit to it.  Pozner dismissed the case right before that deposition was to take place.

The suit was filed by Pozner in county court in Lake County, Florida, case 15 CA 001693.  Lenny pled that he was the father of Noah Pozner, a child who had been killed at the Sandy Hook shooting on Dec. 14, 2012.  His complaint was that Wolf had "intercepted" and published on his website correspondence between Lenny and the Florida Attorney General, Pam Bondi, which contained Lenny's address and other personal information.  Lenny said he had suffered impairment of reputation and standing in the community, personal humiliation, and mental anguish and suffering as a result of the publication.  He sought attorney's fees, costs, and an injunction.

Wolf showed the court more than once not only that he had obtained Lenny's correspondence from Bondi through Florida's Open Records Act (See Doc. 39), but that Lenny's address was stated in Lenny's own suit against gun manufacturers in Connecticut, which is also online.  Pozner's suit against Wolf did not even state a cognizable claim for relief, such as defamation. 

The suit appears to have been a mechanism to conduct a fishing expedition, since Lenny used it to demand production of all correspondence and "emails, instant messages, text messages, voicemails," and more, relating in any way to the "Dec. 14, 2012, Sandy Hook shooting," proving that Noah Pozner did not die, there was no investigation or the investigation was corrupt, the death certificate was forged, and the like (see Doc. 16).  In other words, he wanted to see what Wolf had.  He also wanted to know about Wolf's prior testimony as an expert witness in school safety.  Wolf, by that time representing himself, in error did not respond to the discovery requests, so the plaintiff filed am motion to compel.  Wolf did file a motion to dismiss.  The plaintiff filed a motion to strike the motion to dismiss (Doc. 21) which stated in the body of the motion that it, along with the plaintiff's motion to compel discovery responses, were "Special Set" for hearing on Nov. 9, 2016.  Wolf  (luckily) saw this hearing notice for the motion to compel buried in this other motion that had nothing to do with it, and appeared in court on Nov. 9, 2016, but neither the plaintiff nor his lawyer did, so Lenny's motion to compel was denied (Doc. 28).

Lenny's attorney argued later (Doc. 29) that the Nov. 9 hearing was set without notice to him, accusing Wolf of "underhanded maneuvering" and arguing with the judge about whether his motion could have been denied, since he had had no notice of the hearing--when he set it, himself!  It appears this man even grieved the judge over this (Doc. 96).

Wolf served requests for production, asking for documents identifying Lenny himself, such as birth certificate, naturalization record, driver's license, business licenses, and asking whether he was acting as an agent for any governmental entity and, if so, who he worked for and what his duties were.  Wolf also asked for all documentary evidence related to the claims in Lenny's complaint.  Interestingly, he asked nothing directly about Noah!  Lenny's attorney, Alan Marcus, asked for an extension the day the responses were due (Doc. 36), saying he had been unable to confer with his client.  He then responded with a pile of objections, signing that document himself.  Wolf had also served requests for admissions--and the answers were, again, signed by Alan Marcus.  Both the rules governing requests for admission as well as production say the answers are supposed to be made by the party.  My interpretation of that requirement has always been that an attorney's signature does not suffice.  Marcus moved for an extension to respond to Wolf's interrogatories in April 2017, saying again that he was unable to confer with his client (Doc 64).  

The pièce de résistance is when Wolf noticed Lenny for deposition.  Wolf had tried to confer about a date, and got no response, so set it unilaterally (Doc. 58); and Lenny's attorney moved to strike the notice of deposition and moved for a protective order, asking that the deponent be allowed to appear by telephone (Docs. 60, 61), and purporting to impose numerous conditions on Wolf's being able to take the deposition, at all.   On Aug. 22, 2017, the court finally ordered Leonard Pozner to appear in person for his deposition, and permitted it to be videotaped (Doc. 86).  It granted Pozner a delay of three months based on "medical evidence" that he was unable to attend until November 15, 2017.  On Nov. 13, 2017, two days before the deposition was supposed to take place Pozner dismissed the lawsuit (Doc. 92).

Wolf had another attorney for a limited period, who moved for $3,373.73 in costs after the dismissal, which did not not even include attorney fees.  The claim was denied (Doc. 100).

Throughout this 2-1/2-year ordeal, both Wolf and his wife were subjected to a shocking barrage of profane and threatening emails from Pozner (Doc. 44) saying such things as "Go fuck yourself," wishing Wolf a "nice day and a stroke," calling him a loser and a pedophile, threatening him with harassment charges for communicating with Pozner's attorney, threatening Wolf's wife, and more.  Wolf uncovered multiple aliases, phone numbers, and email addresses used by Pozner, in addition to evidence that he is using the Social Security number of a deceased woman named Anna M. McGuire and owns two handguns, including a Glock with a laser sight (registered under one of the aliases).  Leonard Pozner and his former wife Véronique have a pile of  judgments against them, too.  Wolf has further suffered the hijacking of his identity prior to the lawsuit, by means of packages containing noxious and even dangerous items sent to various people using Wolf's return address.  He has had serious reason to be concerned about this goon--or spook--Pozner, therefore.

It also bears mention that Florida Atlantic University's dismissal of Dr. James Tracy, a tenured professor, began with Pozner, who complained that Tracy had "harassed" him by sending a letter asking for proof that his son died in the shooting.  Pozner's frivolous charge led the University to develop its pretext for dismissing this tenured professor:  that he had failed to fill out forms identifying his extracurricular activities.





Sunday, August 19, 2018

Free-lunch bread crumb trail leads straight to Chalk Hill Middle School


[This article was posted originally on the Cinderella's Broom website, which has now been shut down by WordPress--obviously because of it!  
We must multiply such blog posts a hundredfold every time this happens!]

Free-lunch bread crumb trail leads straight to Chalk Hill Middle School.
-Cinderella’s Broom, March 2, 2016

https://cinderellabroom.wordpress.com/2016/03/02/free-lunch-bread-crumb-trail-leads-straight-to-chalk-hill-middle-school/

This post provides evidence that Chalk Hill Middle School of Monroe, Connecticut may have been used as a replica of Sandy Hook Elementary School long before January 2013 – perhaps as early as 2011.

The evidence is found in a bread crumb trail of free and reduced-rate lunch stats used to calculate high-speed Internet discounts for schools. Newtown’s 2012 paperwork includes Chalk Hill Middle School, whose numbers are identical to that of Sandy Hook Elementary.

Truly glaring – but buried. Fortunately, Cinderella has a shovel as well as a broom.

§

Wolfgang Halbig has been sending Cinderella some interesting documents about free and reduced-price school lunches. It’s disturbing that even in Newtown nowadays – where you might expect many lunchboxes to contain sushi-on-ice – there are children who need that kind of help.

What’s really interesting is how free lunch eligibility stats are used to calculate how much the school system will be discounted on their use of high-speed Internet services. Did you know this? (Cinderella didn’t.)

Well, it’s true. Go here to read about the USAC E-Rate program. Don’t feel too sorry for those responsible for completing application forms for this type of financial aid. They manage to slog through – the discounts are worth it. The website describes how it pays off:

“Discounts for support depend on the category of service requested, the level of poverty and the urban/rural status of the appropriate school district. Discounts range from 20 percent to 90 percent of the costs of eligible services.”

Poverty stats equate to cheaper Internet access for schools. The concept is simple: the poorer the school’s student population (based on free-and-reduced-lunch eligibility stats) the greater the discount.

It gets more interesting, thanks to Mr. Halbig, whose persistent FOIA requests have likewise begun to pay off.

Mr. Halbig sent me a 21-page document with the title “USAC 471 Application” which he received recently.  It’s dry as a bone and full of bureaucratic parlance. However, it contains a very intriguing bread-crumb trail.

Newtown’s 2012 application. It’s obvious on page 1 that this document concerns Newtown’s 2012 application for an E-Rate discount. Here’s a screen shot of the relevant information [go to the pdf here for a clearer copy]:

The relevant information gleaned follows:
  • The billed entity is Newtown Schools.

  • The billed entity’s street address is 3 Primrose Street (where the Newtown Schools’ Board of Education is located).

  • The bill pertains to the entire (Newtown) school district.

Another entity unexpectedly appears. On page 2, Cinderella found something unexpected. Newtown appears to be working with contacts at E-Rate Online’s office at 856 Main Street, Monroe, CT.  Here is the relevant screen shot from page 2:




And it continues on page 3:

And, finally, the bread crumb trail ends – at Chalk Hill Middle School. On page 4. Below is that page in two screen shots stacked below:


As you can see, we have a problem here.

Anomaly #1: Our document of interest concerns E-Rate discounts for Newtown Public Schools. Why, then, is Chalk Hill Middle School, which is in Monroe, not Newtown, listed as one of those schools?

You’ll remember that the Chalk Hill Middle School (at 375 Fan Hill Road in Monroe) was allegedly not opened to accommodate Sandy Hook Elementary School students until after the alleged massacre of 12-14-12. Chalk Hill suddenly became “Sandy Hook Elementary” in January 2013. (Go here and here for MSM articles about that.)

E-Rate discount applications must be filed by late April of the school year they’re intended for. (Go here  and scroll down till you see a little gold-colored banner that says the window closes on April 29th.)

So this application was filed, at latest, in April 2012, not December 2012. [Block 38 shows it was certified on 3/31/12.--ed.]  In 2012, Sandy Hook Elementary students were not supposed to be at Chalk Hill Middle School. They were supposed to be in the icky-sticky brick dungeon that used to be Sandy Hook Elementary School.

Of course, Mr. Halbig, along with many others, has been questioning that all along.

Anomaly #2. Compare the numbers for Sandy Hook Elementary and Chalk Hill Middle School. You will see a striking similarity! Here they are, stacked below:


The numbers are the same. The critical number here seems to be the percentage of children receiving free or reduced-rate lunches. It is exactly the same for both schools: 4.223%. How is this possible?

The numbers for all of the other schools are unique. There is no such striking sameness!  Yet Sandy Hook and Chalk Hill numbers are so completely the same, the schools themselves may as well be the exact same entity.

Could the explanation be that they were the same entity – not only in 2012, but well before that – when these numbers were being collected and compiled?

Of course, strangest of all is that Chalk Hill Middle School of Monroe should be included in an application for Newtown Public Schools in the first place.

Where were Sandy Hook Elementary students before 12-14-12? Were they already at Chalk Hill Middle School? The evidence above seems to be pointing to that possibility while jumping up and down and shouting.

To take that suggestion seriously, let’s consider whether Chalk Hall Middle School was in any condition to house students before January 2013, when it rolled out a red carpet and reportedly began creating a Sandy Hook Elementary replica “down to the crayons on the desks” within its walls.
  • Chalk Hill Middle is much younger (built in 1969) than Sandy Hook Elementary (built in 1956).
  • By 2010, the school was about to lose students to nearby STEM Academy (by design, it seems) and was facing expensive repairs to systems: Broken-down underground water pipes to the boilers, for one. To save money (about $500,000 per year) and trouble, while putting off major repairs, Monroe Public Schools was considering decommissioning Chalk Hill. (Go here for details.)
  • By November 2010, fifth graders had reportedly already been moved out of Chalk Hill (half the school was closed) to Jockey Hollow Middle and there was more talk about “mothballing” the school.
  • By December 2010, the Monroe Schools Superintendent was proposing a one-year closure of the school to save the reported $15MM it would have taken to bring the building’s systems up to par.
  • By December 30, 2010, Monroe was looking at a report by Silver, Petrucelli & Associates of Hamden, CT, an architectural and engineering firm in Hamden. Here is the cover of the report that Mr. Halbig sent Cinderella:

  • The 55-page report vetted three options:
    • Mothballing the school
    • Mothballing the upper floors and keeping the basement open to house the school’s IT department
    • Demolishing the school
  • The report recommended mothballing the school to”preserve the structure for future use”  (p. 7) as a lower cost option. Demolition would have involved significant costs ($1.9MM) due to the presence of a great deal of asbestos and other toxic materials.
  • According to local media, by June 2011, the school was no longer open and was under the control of the town of Monroe, not the Monroe Board of Education. Mr. Halbig told Cinderella that the Superintendent of Monroe Public Schools said that Chalk Hill Middle School was formally turned over to the town of Monroe on July 1, 2011.
  • The town was no longer seriously considering demolition because the building was judged “structurally sound.” In fact, the possibility of turning it into a community center was still on the table.
  • Then 12-14-12 happened and suddenly Chalk Hill Middle was standing ready with cloned Sandy Hook Elementary décor.

Was the school “mothballed” or wasn’t it? It isn’t clear from the MSM reports Cinderella has read. That may be intentional.

Where there are crumbs, a school lunch has likely been eaten. There appear to be crumbs all over Chalk Hall Middle School, if the USAC document is to be believed.

What do you think? Where do you think Sandy Hook Elementary students were during that critical time (2008-2012) when the Wayback Machine ferret was no longer sniffing at the Sandy Hook school URL?

Cinderella was amused by the idea that they were all being harbored at Newtown Youth Academy. See the post here. What a funny idea that was!

But funny does not a good hypothesis make. Facts, such as those in the USAC document, rival a good joke any day, such as the one played on us all by the Sandy Hook amateur thespian guild.

Crumbs, dear readers, crumbs. Stick to the crumbs.


###