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.