OPINION AND EDITORIAL
A lawsuit, originally filed in the U.S. District Court for South Carolina, has traveled a road “with many a winding turn” (“He Ain’t Heavy”). Now this lawsuit, which was birthed in the shadow of the Port of Charleston, South Carolina “dirty bomb hoax” (June 14, 2017), has become a garden variety slander, libel and defamation case in the Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.). Or has it? New allegations return the lawsuit to its roots in racketeering, wire fraud, mail fraud and a new twist — obstruction of justice. Consider that the lawsuit was filed in Charleston on June 14, 2018 — on the one year anniversary of the “dirty bomb hoax”. Many Internet observers find the 180 degree turn around an eery foreshadowing of deja vu.
STAGE ONE: PORT OF CHARLESTON “DIRTY BOMB” RACKETEERING
Aggressive “active measures” are afoot in the Internet blog-o-sphere to re-write the history of the Port of Charleston “dirty bomb hoax”, which is directly traceable to George Webb, Jason Goodman and Patricia “Trish” Negron.
The CrowdSource Source The Truth conspiracy channels sponsored the escalation of the “dirty bomb” rumors into a full-scale radiological emergency response by elements of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Coast Guard, South Carolina State Police, U.S. Navy, and at least six (6) more agencies.
Port of Charleston, Wando Terminal (Mount Pleasant, South Carolina)
Largest and newest of the three Charleston container terminals, the Wando Terminal serves the container vessels of Maersk and MSC, amongst others.
400 Long Point Rd., Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464
STAGE TWO: GARDEN VARIETY SLANDER, DEFAMATION AND LIBEL CASE
On September 11, 2019 a new Second Amendment Complaint (SAC [Doc. No. 88]) was filed after invitation from the presiding judge. The SAC had all previous references to racketeering carved out. Shortly thereafter a pre-trial Rule 24 discovery case was convened with the accompanying posting of discovery orders. All seemed stable — except for the occasional e-mail message from Brooklyn psychic Marcus Conte to the presiding and magistrate judge.
The messages seem to have an obstructionist tone, as if designed only for the purposes of fouling up the orderly processes involved in efficient judicial administration. Many Internet observers recalled the alleged meddling of George Webb and Jason Goodman into the U.S. Government’s criminal case against Imran Awan.
Imran Awan’s Lawyer Chris Gowen Discusses Inadvertent Disclosure and Diet Coke Delivery12,533 views•Jun 7, 2018
89.1K subscribersIn an epic phone call, Imran Awan’s defense attorney mumbles, stutters, filibusters and tried to lure me into a possibly illegal wager, but answers no substantial questions. Become a Sponsor of Crowdsource the Truth
Jason Goodman directly inserted himself into the litigation activities surrounding this criminal investigation. These activities included writing letters to the U.S. Attorney assigned to the case, allegedly harassing telephone calls to defense counsel, visiting and broadcasting podcast content such as the legal offices of defense counsel to identify Imran Awan as an employee (illegal under District of Columbia stalking laws).
UPDATED June 13, 2018
BUSTED VIDEO: With Criminal Case Pending, Imran Awan Now Employed by Law Firm of His Clinton-Linked Defense Attorneys
One way to keep someone silent is to make sure you find them a job you can control. An old trick in the Clinton political and crony playbook.
Imran Awan is currently employed by the same firm that is trying to keep him and his wife from serving time in federal prison.
Welcome to The Swamp.
New video and intelligence from Crowdsource the Truth emerged Monday when editor Jason Goodman visited the law offices of Awan’s attorney. A law firm official acknowledged Awan was inside the office but would not allow him to speak on camera. According to several sources, Awan has been answering the phones at the law firm for untold weeks, possibly longer.
Whether paid or unpaid, it’s absolutely stunning in any legal realm.
In fact, Jason Goodman produced podcasts indicating that he was detained and questioned by U.S. marshals when he allegedly blocked the vehicle caring the defendant leaving the federal courthouse in the District of Columbia.
We would contact the federal judge presiding over the Imran and Hina Alvi Awan case but she was appointed by Obama who — if the FBI was legitimate — likely would be implicated in the Awan’s IT escapades during their employment with Congress. But the FBI is corrupt, just like every government entity linked to this case. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who hired the Awan clan is pals with Hillary. Hillary’s husband gets Imran a defense attorney. Wasserman’s brother is a federal prosecutor working on the same case. The judge and her husband donated to Barack Obama before both getting appointed to benches by Obama.
Above: Jason Goodman podcast “U.S. Marshals .. Intimidate … Jason Goodman (left) and TRUE PUNDIT articles always heralded another CrowdSource The Truth video with Jason Goodman investigating Imran Awan (right)
Another stunning apparent breach of legal protocols occurred when Jason Goodman “convinced” Imran Awan tenant Laura Everly (alleged gal pal of Queen Tut, aka Susan B. Holmes, Fort Collins, Colorado [ex-Goodman sidekick]) to surrender a laptop to the U.S. Capitol Police, rather than the Federal Bureau of Investigation (F.B.I.).
The second material witness to Imran Awan’s alleged crimes comes forward to reveal the story in her own words. Become a sponsor of Crowdsource the Truth
The Capitol Police turned over a trove of evidence in the alleged Imran Awan House cyberbreach and theft case to the defense attorneys when they were supposed to deliver it to prosecutors instead, according to court documents and a source.
And hours after The Daily Caller News Foundation asked prosecutors about the disclosure, Awan’s lawyer said he had learned of the forthcoming story from a source on Capitol Hill. TheDCNF had not told anyone other than prosecutors about it.
Above: Articles by “TRUE PUNDIT”, Michael D. Moore of West Chester, Penn., aka “THOMAS PAINE”.
STAGE THREE: WIRE AND MAIL FRAUD RACKETEERING TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE
Brooklyn psychic Marcus Conte, a 55 y.o. social media blogger, began inserting himself in the pending libel, slander and defamation lawsuit immediately after the filing of the SAC [Doc. No. 88]. A total of three (3) e-mail messages and follow-up letters were sent by Conte to the presiding and magistrate judge allegedly interfering with the case.
Conte was very active in creating dozens of videos concerning the pending slander, libel and defamation lawsuit against Jason Goodman. Conte distributed podcasts depicting the transmission of e-mail messages to federal judges. Conte is also fond of calling the F.B.I. to report the plaintiff in the Jason Goodman lawsuit for various crimes.
Above: Conte has co-produced video podcasts with Jason Goodman on CrowdSource The Truth
click on court document for PDF (below)
Above: Manuel Chavez, III
Meanwhile at Fort Collins, Colorado – “red flag law”
Above: “Queen Tut”, aka Susan B. Holmes, Fort Collins, Colo.
The mother of a 19-year-old Fort Collins man who was fatally shot by two police officers in 2017 has used Colorado’s new red flag law to file an extreme risk protection order against one of the officers.
Susan Holmes, the mother of Jeremy Holmes, filed a petition for an extreme risk protection order against Colorado State University police Cpl. Philip Morris on Jan. 9.
Protection orders are granted to people who have been determined by the courts to pose a significant risk to themselves or others. They prevent the person from possessing or purchasing firearms for the next 364 days.
FORT COLLINS, Colo. (AP) — A judge on Thursday denied a petition to seize the guns of a police officer involved in the 2017 fatal shooting of a 19-year-old which was sought by the teen’s mother under Colorado’s new red flag law.
In her Jan. 9 petition for an extreme risk protection order, Susan Holmes said there was a credible risk of unlawful or reckless use of a firearm by Colorado State University police Officer Phillip Morris because he threatened and killed her son, Jeremy Holmes, and because she said he has shown ongoing violence and aggression.
The law, which took effect Jan. 1, is similar to those adopted in over a dozen other states and intended to allow family members or law enforcement to seek a court order to confiscate the weapons of people they believe could harm themselves or others.
The mother of a 19-year-old man killed by Colorado State University Police in 2017 has invoked Colorado’s new red flag law in an effort to take weapons away from the officer who shot her son.
On Jan. 9, Susan Holmes filed an extreme risk protection order petition against CSU Police Cpl. Philip Morris, according to court documents first reported by 9News.
A hearing has been set for Thursday in Larimer County court for a judge to decide if Holmes’ case against Morris warrants the removal of his firearms. There was not a request for a temporary order in this case, Judicial Department spokesman Jon Sarché told 9News Tuesday afternoon.
Above: Defendant in Jason Goodman slander, libel and defamation lawsuit in Virginia, Susan B. Holmes, aka “Queen Tut”
The red flag law allows law enforcement, a family member or household resident to petition to have a person’s firearms removed if they are deemed by a judge to be a threat to themselves or others.
In the petition, Holmes falsely claimed she is a family or household member of Morris, specifically that she has a child in common with him. She also claimed Morris recklessly used a firearm in her son’s death.
The shooting was deemed justified use of force by the Larimer County District Attorney’s Office.
WE LOVE SDNY
To be continued…
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of criminal justice, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner