There is no Tig Notaro Controversy part 2

 So many hits using that keyword, "Tig Notaro controversy," and it's very curious, of course.  Apparently some souls out there are under the impression that there is a controversy when in fact it's just a plain old travesty.


Tig Notaro made up false acussations non stop . She, according to law, stalked and harassed me and my family by doing so, on the many ocassions. Tig Notaro   saw fit to malign and slander those who had no idea nor did care who the hell she was. She was an abject and uninteresting stranger to us. That is a fact. Yet, for non sane  reasons she wanted to ruin our lives.  Make your guesses but it will never makes sense to anyone but a sociopath. And, I contend with complete confidence- Stef Willen, Mathilde Notaro, Reeta Piazza, Michael Griffee et al. are the types to understand as they are liars and creeps and sociopaths. I certainly would never lie about someone like that and no half way decent person would. But, they did and they were all caught more than they know.

Till then, I fight(more effective seeming remedies that this) and fuss . I write these too esoteric posts because how can one express such destruction and such disgust.  If I really go into it it becomes too incredible and I am keenly aware of credibility and perception.

Reeta Piazza, the manager of the Improv comedy club, is particularly so vile, that it will astound when  it comes  out too . Many  will want to spit at her nauseating face, I assure you. The  documents again come to the rescue.

The others I"ll leave for another day but suffice it to say anyone named is the lowest of the low- Those that  good people must be warned of. I do a public service here.

Where was I? Oh yes, Controversy? None. Tig lost her big bad vicious trial and she will lose all the rest very soon. You don't start a gang rape and get away with it.  She and Stef Willen started the ball and it is still rolling. They  are responsible for all the proximate damages that resulted from the other perverts that they invited.

Now, you have con artist lawyers using lies and malicious prosecution to their advantage. You have too obviously bogus decisions from notoriously corrupt judges. What a sewere is L.A.

But, today, dear readers looking to see if there is a controversy- know there isn't one. There are only , so far , a silent scandal and a huge travesty but there is no controversy.

P.S. Do not ever hire a man by the name of James or Jamie Silverstein- He is a true blue piece of shit who digs holes for you and then for himself. He will not only not defend you after he takes a huge fee,  but he will then defame you shamelessly. He's batshit is what he is. Bat-shit.


What is put on the internet for all time ,but which is a complete sham that could have easily been prevented. the first paragraph one got a strangely large amount of readers and so I hope this does too because hey who doesn't want to reveal the truth to as many people as they can when it affects every aspect of their life.

Appelate court unpublished decision put on Internet.
On the evening of April 7, 2008, after Notaro performed at Largo, Spitzberg approached her and asked Notaro if she remembered her. Notaro said that she remembered meeting her and that Spitzberg had been aggressive and had pushed her. Notaro then said she did not want to talk to Spitzberg and told Spitzberg to leave her alone.

Notaro From Police report –April 7.2008- given April 30th 2008

On April 7, 2008 Notaro was performing at Largo. At approximately 2130 hours Notaro was talking to her agent when Spitzerg stepped in front  of her and stated, “  You remember me?”

Notaro’s statement in Affidavit to obtain restraining order- April  7, 2008

On the evening of April 7, 2,008. I performed at Largo in Hollywood, CA.. After I got off stage alisa approached me to ask if I remembered her. I said plainly, “Yes, I do.” And then continued a conversation I was having with my agent.

transcript  testimony of Notaro of april 7 –gets date wrong but insignificant
MS. NOTARO:  ON APRIL 12 SHE SHOWED UP, AND AFTER SHE SHOWED, I WAS SPEAKING TO MY AGENT, ALISA INTERRUPTED ME, AND SAID:"YOU DON'T REMEMBER ME.  DO YOU REMEMBER ME?"  I SAID, "I DO," AND THEN TURNED BACK TO MY AGENT. THEN SHE INTERRUPTED ME AGAIN.  SHE SAID "I DON'T THINK YOU REMEMBER ME."  I SAID, "I DO REMEMBER YOU.    TIME I MET YOU YOU WERE AGGRESSIVE. YOU PUSHED ME, AND I DON'T WANT TO TALK TO YOU AT ALL."THEN SHE GOT IN MY FACE AND -- IF YOU WILL EXCUSE ME, I WILL TELL YOU WHAT SHE SAID.
THE COURT:  TELL ME WHAT SHE SAID
MS. NOTARO: SHE CALLED ME A CRAZY DIKE CUNT GOT IN THE MY FACE.  AND AT THAT POINT I HAD THE SECURITYREMOVE HER,

Notaro’s statement about april 7th to investigator for PD given in January of 2009


Sometimes during that evening Notaro said she had seen Alisa sitting inside of this club and near the bar area.   Notaro advised that her brand new agent Heidi was also in attendance to see her perform her comedy show. After her show was over Notaro said she was in the audience and she was speaking to her agent.
All of a sudden, Notaro stated that Alisa then walked up to the two of them and said, “ Do you know who I am?” Do you remember me? Notaro replied back to her and said,  “I know who you are .

Notaro’s statement to Martin Boags, City attorney o 12/16/09
The witness confirmed the contents of various police reports written in this matter. The witness added the following.
The witness was talking to her agent, heidi Feigin from the william Morris Agency. The parties where at Largo when they were at Fairfax. The defendan’t asked Ms. Notaro’ “ Do you know who I am. Ms. Notaro responded, “ yes leave me alone.” Defendant stated, “ I don’t think you remember me.
Ms. Notaro responded, “ I remember you. You shoved me., ‘ get away from me. 


Heidi Feigin-  was notaro’s agent and went to see her that night. investigator’s report for public defender.
           
            When asked if this female subject caused any trouble at the show at Largo at this night in question, Feigin said no she had caused no problems on that particular evening. She stated she had just sat at the back of this club and next to the bar while watching the show.  When asked if she had seen this unknown female subject ever make contact with Notaro on that night in question, Feigin said no.  When asked if she knew the unknown subject’s name, Feigin once again stated no.

What this agent, Heidi Feigin told my public defender in March of 2010 during the criminal trial stemming from these lies- 

"Nothing what Tig said was true AT ALL(pd's emphasis) and I don't understand why Hunter Siedman( apparently  Tig's Manager) is calling me and saying, "Don't testify for the other side,"

 My side of this:  I never bothered this person nor would- I had no reason to dislike her and I didn't. What Hunter Seidman did is very big and bad but so far he has remained unprosecuted for obstruction of justice. Notaro invented this whole thing and yet the minute she obtained the law firm of Lavely and Singer she was allowed to trample me and my family and take away so many of my freedoms for so long. Notaro is a ruthless sociopath and got other ruthless sociopaths on her side.Her lies led to a two year odyssey that will get told but since the first paragraph got so many reads I'll post this.

James Evan Silverstein is a Fee and plea lawyer who defames when found out

Many Criminal Lawyers Take the Defendant's Money; Do Little Trial Preparation; and Urge the Defendant to Plea Once He/She Has No More Money to Turn Over to the Defense Lawyer - A Process Known by Judges and Attorneys as "Fee and Plea"

What this means is that the defense lawyer keeps asking for more and more money from the defendant or the defendant's family, prior to trial (and possibly during the occasional trial which is started), and as soon as the defendant and his family run out of money, urge the defendant to plead guilty. Meanwhile, the defense lawyer, knowing that 19 out of 20 of his/her criminal cases are going to result in a conviction by a "Guilty Plea", even though the client may not be guilty, does not do all that needs to be done to prepare for trial, because the vast majority of his cases wind up with his/her client pleading guilty. The lawyer who gets the most and does the least for the client becomes the most financially successful criminal lawyer, because he/she retains a large part of the legal fee without doing the promised work or getting the needed experts, or conducting the needed investigation.
From the criminal lawyer's standpoint, it can be said that as long as the prosecutors are corrupt and abusive, there is very little the criminal lawyer can do without large sums of money to try to overcome the corruption and abuse, so why not take as much as you can get, and do as little as possible. How do you fight a corrupt prosecution, which refuses to accept or turn over exculpatory evidence. The defendant is not allowed discovery rights as a general matter, and the prosecution is permitted to obtain millions of dollars of discovery over a period of several years or more. How can you fight this, the criminal defense lawyer would probably say.
The criminal lawyers probably believe that to fight the system is too costly and could impact adversely on the other 18 criminal cases which he/she needs to settle through as favorable a plea arrangement as possible.
Another factor is that federal judges are appointed in far fewer numbers than the matters which are presented to them for handling, and it is generally known that federal judges tend to hand out harsh sentences for those who dare to go to trial and lose, as most of the defendants are bound to do because of the abusive and corrupt practices of the prosecutors.
In any event, regardless of the cause, what can be done about this Fee and Plea method of convicting 95% of the persons who are accused of criminal conduct, many of whom would not be convicted if the criminal system were just?
Defendants should discuss this problem with their attorney before committing to the attorney (because by giving the attorney the money requested, the defendant is preventing himself from hiring another attorney, due to lack of funds).
Defendants and their attorney should prepare a game plan with various goals, and the attorney should report every week or two on the accomplishment of the goals, or lack of accomplishment, and the defendant should be involved, to keep the lawyer on track. The defendant has got to assume responsibility in this regard because of the prevalent practice among defense attorneys not to do what needs to be done to obtain a just result. The attorneys know more than the clients, and are not telling the clients how bad the system really is, until the money supply runs out, and then the attorney can't act fast enough to convince the client to plead guilty.
Why doesn't the lawyer start off the first interview with a statement that the indictment is tantamount to your conviction because of the corruption and abuse in the criminal system, and you might as well plead guilty right away, and save yourself and your family a lot of money. By pleading guilty today you can probably get a much lower sentence, and get it over with more quickly.
The result is that we have the largest prison population, per capita, of all civilized countries, which undoubtedly is because the accusation is the conviction, without due process and without any trial. At the same time, the prosecutor's fame, compensation, power and importance shoot up, and the last thing the prosecutor wants to hear is that he/she did anything wrong, or that he has convicted hundreds of innocent persons (meaning, convicted persons who would not have been convicted under the rules of the game if the prosecutor had stayed within the rules).
Remember, the rules are designed to prevent innocent persons from going to jail, and we purposely permit some guilty persons to go free in order to ensure that innocent people are not convicted, and jailed or executed. We are obviously failing in this respect, and not only with hundreds of innocent persons being convicted or murder and being executed, for a crime they did not permit. The situation is much worse when it comes to non-capital crimes, where the press is not focussed on the illegality of the system, and in fact is a major cause of the abuses taking place through their editorial policy of advocating more heavy-handed enforcement against alleged criminals (whether they committed the crime or not). 

Copyright carl person.