Harold W. Vadney III is a wannabe translator who lies about his credentials. In August 2007, I exposed him on the now-defunct Network of Independent Linguists’ Discussion Forum. He has now set up a blog devoted to telling lies about me and others. This is my reply. To comment or for further information write to Richard_Benham_AU-StopVadneysLies[at]yahoo.com.

Sunday, 29 June 2008

Strewing manure?

As mentioned in my ballad, Vadney is full of shit. Not only is it amazing how much of it he can stuff into that grotesquely stunted little body of his, but also just how much bullshit he manages to compress into a few lines of clumsily-written prose:
That's one of the reasons why we [sic!] have stopped responding to the manure still being strewn by Troll Benham and Sockpuppet Horne. They're evil and envious and have nothing to do. Period.

Strewing manure? That’s a fine charge to be throwing at me and my colleague! Sources close to the New York State Police inform me that Vadney was reprimanded on 6 May after carefully placing two sandwich-bags full of doggy-do (well, I hope it was doggy-do) on the street in front of the house of one of the defendants to his famous and ill-fated lawsuit.

Who’s evil? Who’s envious? Who’s got nothing to do?

I don’t claim to be perfect, but I have never pursued an innocent and seriously ill man to his grave with a frivolous lawsuit.

And I should envy a man who claims to be a professional translator but only gets work once every blue moon? Who tried for five years to get a regular job without success? Who claims to be a language professional but consistently misspells simple words? I should envy a no-hoper whose main chance of making something of himself is to sue innocent people for millions of dollars for telling the truth about him? Who just lost a fifty-million-dollar lawsuit? Who is so insecure he makes fun of other people’s minor disabilities, even though he can’t pronounce the letter r? Who has such an inferiority complex about his lack of education and his trailer-trash origins he poses for a portrait in a labcoat marked “Dr. H. W. Vadney”? Who feels so inadequate about his aging appearance he has to dye his hair? Who stands for election to a $10,000 job and gets 2.4 percent of the vote?

And of course, Vadney has plenty to do. Like depositing bags of dogshit on the street. Like concocting stupid lawsuits about bloody nothing. Like calling witnesses and boring everybody’s tits off for 3.5 days but not even calling himself or anyone else who might actually support his case. Like bragging about his assets in Europe and then claiming to be too poor to pay the costs of his hopeless appeal. Or bragging about how he “knows the law” and then whingeing about how he didn’t get a fair trial because the judge didn’t help him. Like running infantile hate campaigns in an effort to trash the reputations of serious professionals. (Don’t be misled: Vadney is neither serious nor a professional anything, except perhaps a professional litigant and a professional pain in the butt.) Like campaigning in elections he’d have no hope of winning even if people did believe his lies. Like fabricating credentials and forging documents....

Does the word “projection” ring a bell, anyone?

Vadney’s Notice of Appeal

All this reminds me. Vadney’s notice of appeal has been obtained from the Greene County Clerk’s Office. It is entertaining reading. Here are some highlights (numbering omitted):

  • I believe I may have overestimated my understanding of the language of the court and of procedure at trial and that the court should have recognized that I may have made a procedural error but the court did not assure itself that I understood that I had a right to take the stand or not take the stand at a specific point before the court requested motions.

  • I believe the court erred in that it failed to explicitly tell me that I had the opportunity and right to take the stand to testify on the facts to the jury.

  • I believe the court erred in not explicitly asking me if I wished to testify before the court took motions.

  • I believe the court erred and abused its discretion when, upon hearing my answer to the defendant’s motion to dismiss, refused to allow me to take the stand despite my vigorous requests to testify.

  • I believe the court erred and abused its discretion in not allowing me to testify despite my express requests to do so.

  • I believe the court erred and abused its discretion in that the court’s refusal to take notice of my request to treat previous defendants in the case before it and who were subpoenaed by me to testify and appear, as hostile witnesses.

  • I believe that the court failed to exercise control of witnesses by allowing them to ramble and to refuse to answer for the most specious presumptions or to refuse to identify an exhibit or to criticize a true and correct exhibit for idiotic reasons.

  • I cannot afford an attorney to represent me and must proceed pro se.

  • I do not have the resources to cover the costs of this appeal or of another trial.

  • I wish to proceed to appeal and retrial as a poor person.

Note the idiosyncratic syntax of some of the items. Note too that he complains repeatedly that the judge didn’t explain procedure to him, despite his persistent bragging about his legal knowledge and having run for election as a judge himself on two occasions....

I hope to post a scanned copy of the whole document, along with the judge’s findings and maybe even the hour-long diatribe in response to counsel for the defendant’s motion for dismissal, in which Vadney is alleged to have so expressly and vigorously requested to be allowed to testify, despite having already closed his case.


Scott Horne said...

Putting bags of dog faeces out in front of his neighbours' house after losing his vexatious and frivolous lawsuit to them? How infantile!

Thanks for posting extracts of Mr Vadney's notice of intent to appeal, Richard. I can hardly stop laughing long enough to type these words.

The one point on which I agree with him wholeheartedly is that he doesn't know beans about the law. Unfortunately for him, ignorance of the law doesn't excuse shit. It certainly doesn't get him any special attention in court--although actually he received more than his fair share of courtesies (and, as usual, now exhibits ingratitude). The court does not have to do his legal work for him; it is in fact not allowed to do so. People who don't know the law ordinarily hire lawyers to do their suing for them. For that matter, even most lawyers would hire counsel if they were suing for an eight-figure sum.

There's no need to go into his other claims, for they are irrelevant. Even if the court had erred as Mr Vadney alleges, the judgement would be allowed to stand.

Can Mr Vadney really expect to be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis just by claiming to be poor? when he himself had initiated the vexatious and frivolous lawsuit? Such requests must be made by application, with a statement of assets, liabilities, and income. Even if Mr Vadney meets the criteria, his request won't be accepted unless the case is found to be meritorious--which it isn't.

Or, when he claimed to be "a poor person", maybe he omitted the words "excuse for a" at one point.

But the real prize is that Mr Vadney has now gone on public record as saying that he doesn't know the law and that he is poor. These claims can now be cited by anyone. In particular, they can be cited in court if Mr Vadney is foolish enough to attempt another vexatious and frivolous lawsuit.

Ladies and gentlemen, I hereby proclaim the end of Mr Harold Vadney's career as a vexatious litigant. Thanks to the information on public record, he will no longer be allowed to harass people by means of the courts. Defendants who know about Mr Vadney's communications with the court in Greene County can simply point their lawyers to the documents, and that will be that.

By the way, has Mr Vadney paid the judgements that his neighbours—truly noble people—won against him? I should certainly think so, if he is indeed as "honest", "ethical", "fair", and "accountable" as he claims to be. Without knowing the details, I'd estimate those judgements at some $10k. That's cheap—too damn cheap. He should count himself lucky if the defendants don't sue him for their lawyers' fees and anything else they can get.

Richard D. Benham said...

Thanks for your support (as always), Scott. The paragraphs I published are only 10 out of 32; the others don’t paint him in a very good light either.

I hope you’re right about Vadney’s activities coming to an end. I hope that in future courts recognize him for what he is and send him packing. Certainly, the better-known his true nature is, the easier it is for other people to fight him. That’s why I continue to publicize his mindless machinations, even though it is not really in my interests, as I would probably be better off he ignoring him, in the hope that would go away. On top of that, I hope it will be of some comfort to his other victims to know that they’re not alone.

Scott Horne said...

Similarly, I have no desire to waste my time talking about Mr Vadney, or even thinking about him. I shall continue to support your laudable efforts, however, and to defend other people who are being harassed or intimidated by this antisocial guttersnipe.

The forces of righteousness have prevailed; Mr Vadney will no longer be able to abuse the court system. He is reduced to collecting excrement in bags and pleading poverty to the courts. I'm so happy that his career as a vexatious litigant and all-purpose troublemaker is over. Now I can put him out of my mind and spend more time on my multifarious personal and professional pursuits, as well as on people who matter. Far too much of my time has been wasted on Mr Vadney.

Richard D. Benham said...

I certainly think this is a victory for the good guys, but I don’t think we can write off the Vadney as a force for evil just yet. I think the forces of righteousness need to keep kicking him while he is down. With a bit of luck, his spirit will be broken and/or he will just go into a decline and die. The world will be a much better place without him. His remains might even make good fertilizer for someone’s garden.

Scott Horne said...

His evil spirit has already been broken. Effectively deprived of his access to the courts, he is reduced to scooping up dog shit and setting it in front of his neighbours' houses. He is simply irrelevant. With him or without him, the world is already becoming a better place. I don't want to waste any more of my time on him.

Richard D. Benham said...

Well that’s probably very wise. I hope the bastard im- or explodes very soon. Perhaps he can become the doggy-do crusader.

Scott Horne said...

Yes, his intimate association with dog faeces strikes me as most apropos.

About Me

I am a professional translator in the combinations French>English and German>English. I hold qualifications from the University of Adelaide (BA, DipCompSc), the Australian National University (LittB), the University of Geneva (Certificat de spécialisation en linguistique), and the the UK-based Institute of Linguists (Diploma in Translation for both my language combinations). I am an implacable opponent of bullshit in all its forms.