THE SANDY HOOK “POZNER v. FETZER” LAWSUIT FOR DUMMIES

Jim Fetzer

On 27 November 2018, the Minneapolis law firm, Meshbesher and Spence, Ltd., filed a suit against me on behalf of its client, Plaintiff Leonard Pozner, for defamation, and I was properly served on 29 November 2018. Under Wisconsin law, a Defendant has 45 days to submit a response, which would make it imperative that I reply by 11 January 2019, with either an ANSWER or a MOTION TO DISMISS. I filed an ANSWER rather than a MOTION TO DISMISS early on 4 January 2019 because I do not want the case to be dismissed. I want to have a formal, legal resolution.

The Complaint is narrowly drawn to focus on assertions I have made–no doubt, hundreds of times–that the death certificate that Leonard Pozner gave to Kelley Watt is a fabrication, where the Complaint cites two instances in which I made that assertion, one from Ch. 11 of the book, NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2nd edition, 2016), which I edited, and one from “How We Know Sandy Hook Was A FEMA Drill, Nobody Died, for an Anti-Gun Agenda” (5 August 2018), published as a contribution to SANDY HOOK TRUTH: MEMORANDA FOR THE PRESIDENT (2018).

The Complaint (paraphrasing for simplicity) alleges that those assertions are false because the death certificate is not a fabrication or forgery or fake (all words I have used to describe it) and does not differ “in any material respect” from the death certificate certified by the State of Connecticut. It further alleges that my assertions were made in reckless disregard of the facts and intended to harm Plaintiff’s reputation and subject Plaintiff to public contempt, disgrace, ridicule or attack. By my ANSWER, I categorically reject and deny each and every one of these allegations.

The specifics of my response are detailed in my ANSWER (below), which is available as a public document from the Dane County Courthouse, Madison, WI. While I do believe the Plaintiff, Leonard Pozner, is in fact deserving of public contempt, disgrace, ridicule and attack, my efforts have been directed solely at determining the truth about Sandy Hook in collaboration with other students of the case independent of their consequences for affected parties. As the saying goes, “Let the chips fall where they may!” Moreover, since the Plaintiff has been actively involved in the effort to suppress research that would expose the truth about Sandy Hook, he has thereby made himself a public figure.

Condensed into a nutshell, the arguments of the parties to this dispute adopt the following stances or positions:

PLAINTIFF: Since the death certificate that Leonard Pozner gave to Kelley Watt does not differ “in any material respect” from the death certificate certified by the State of Connecticut, it must be authentic and therefore cannot be a fake, a forgery or a fabrication, as the Defendant claims; and, as a consequence, he has defamed the Plaintiff;

DEFENDANT: Since the death certificate that Leonard Pozner gave to Kelley Watt has been shown to be a fake, a forgery or a fabrication, as the Defendant claims, if the death certificate certified by the State of Connecticut does not differ “in any material respect,” the State of Connecticut has certified a fabrication, which qualifies as a crime.

Moreover, as my ANSWER explains, these documents are not the same in every material respect, where the official copy has a file number which the copy given to Kelley Watt lacks and has a state seal which the copy given to Kelley Watt also lacks. There are other differences that may be expected to emerge at trial, but over and beyond the direct proof that the copy given to Kelley Watt is a fabrication, there is a mountain of indirect proof that the copy given to Kelley Watt–and the state certified copy–cannot possibly be authentic because nobody died at Sandy Hook.

If nobody died at Sandy Hook, then any death certificate for victims of the purported shooing must be fabrications. This is not rocket science. Moreover, research conducted since the publication of NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2nd edition, 2016), has confirmed the conjecture initially advanced by Kelley Watt that the party called “N.P.” (for “Noah Pozner”) in the Complaint is a fiction made up out of photographs of one Michael Vabner, said to be the older step-brother of Noah but one-and-the-same person shown in many photographs published by the Plaintiff himself:

My legal response to the lawsuit, of course, is presented in my ANSWER rather than in these informal remarks, which are intended to provide a summary overview of the lawsuit and why it matters. For anyone who wants to have an introduction to the evidence that establishes, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Sandy Hook was a two-day FEMA exercise involving children presented as mass murder to promote gun control as an element of the political agenda of Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Eric Holder and other government officials at the time, check out this video:

To watch this 2-hour summary of the evidence on Bitchute, click here

No doubt, many readers may be baffled that someone who is being sued would discuss the case so openly. That is contrary to ordinary experience. But this is not an ordinary case. As I have extensively documented, the mainstream media has been conducting an exercise in disinformation to keep the truth about Sandy Hook from the public. As an illustration, read “FAKE NEWS about FALSE FLAG Lawsuit: AP Reporter caught Falsifying Story” (9 December  2018). The on-going series of staged attacks to manipulate public opinion must end. This is where I am taking my stand.

 

STATE OF WISCONSIN                     CIRCUIT COURT                         DANE COUNTY 

————————————————————–

Leonard Pozner,                                                                     CASE TYPE: DEFAMATION

Plaintiff

 

ANSWER BY DEFENDANT

JAMES FETZER

 

James Fetzer,

Mike Palecek, and                                                                       No. 2018-CV-003122

Wrongs without Wremedies, LLC,

Defendants

————————————————————-

Comes now the defendant James Fetzer, and he answers the complaint as follows in reference to himself and his co-defendants defendants acting in concert with him, to wit:

  1. Assuming he is a real person, the plaintiff styling himself as Leonard Pozner has thrust himself into the forefront of public controversy, and is,  therefore,  a  public figure.  The  present case is therefore governed by New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U. S. 254 (l964), and Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U. S. 64 (1964). In any event, the plaintiff cannot prevail against the defendant James Fetzer and/or those acting in concert with him, unless he, the said plaintiff, can prove by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant James Fetzer and/or those acting in concert with him published with willful or reckless disregard for the truth — in other words, unless the defendant Fetzer and/or the other defendants published with knowledge that the publications complained of were false or that the publications complained of were written with a high degree of certainty that they were probably false –, no actionable tort or legal wrong has been committed. The publications complained of were in any event true and, if mistaken in any respect, they were written in good faith and were and still are for good cause believed to be true. The defendant James Fetzer answers pro se in reference to himself and the other named defendants, until he and his co-defendants are able to secure adequate representation in this cause. This answer has been prepared under the guidance and with the assistance of a lawyer accepting the account of the defendant Fetzer, who has served as an officer in the Marine Corps and holds the degree of Doctor of Philosophy granted in 1970, has taught the philosophy of science in several institutions of higher learning in the United States over the course of thirty- five years, and is now Distinguished McKnight University Professor Emeritus on the Duluth Campus of the University of Minnesota. Everything complained of in this cause was prepared  by the defendant Fetzer on the basis of his learning, study, experience, and conviction that everything complained of in this cause is true in fact and/or true to a high degree of rational certainty. Regarding the subject matter of the publications complained of, the defendant Fetzer pleads as follows:

BACKGROUND FACTS

  1. This matter arises from allegations that the plaintiff designated as Leonard Pozner is victim of defamation by the defendant James Fetzer, acting in concert with the other named defendants. The claims giving rise to the allegations of defamation in the complaint stem from an event which is said to have occurred on December 14, 2012 at Sandy Hook Elementary School in the municipality of Newtown, Fairfield County, State of Connecticut. According to the version of the facts reported by the mainstream media (including ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN) and published in The New York Times and other newspapers around the world, a psychologically distraught 20-year-old male, by the name of Adam Lanza, stole several guns from his mother before shooting her in her bed with a rifle, then drove to Sandy Hook Elementary School and entered the building by blasting a hole in the front glass window, then killed twenty first-grade children and six adults, including the principal, before taking his own life.
  2. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant Fetzer and those acting in concert with him did not exercise due diligence in the exercise of their journalistic responsibilities and thereby defamed the plaintiff by falsely and maliciously asserting that the plaintiff had “circulated a forgery” of a death certificate for his son, Noah Pozner (to whom he makes reference in the complaint as “N. P.”), and that the defendant Fetzer and those acting in concert with him, did so in order “to harm plaintiff’s reputation and to subject the plaintiff to public contempt, disgrace, ridicule or attack.” The complaint alleges that the “plaintiff is a private individual, and is neither a public official nor a public figure”. The plaintiff acknowledges having made efforts to debunk published falsehoods about Sandy Hook, among other things by releasing the death certificate of N.P. in order “to rebut claims that his son was not killed at Sandy Hook.” The plaintiff pleads that his “Appendix 1” is in fact a death certificate allegedly certified by the State of Connecticut, and that the copy of the said death certificate reproduced by the plaintiff does not differ from the certified original “in any material respect.”
  3. The plaintiff cites several references in support of his complaint, including Chapter 11 of in the first edition published in 2015, and second edition republished in 2016, on pages 177-186 of both editions of a book entitled Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, by Jim Fetzer, Ph.D., and a colleague by the name of Kelley Watt. Said Chapter 11 is identical in both editions. The defendant Fetzer stands by all evidence and commentary set forth, not only in Chapter 11, but the entire book, affirming its truth and persuasiveness of the arguments published therein.
  4. The plaintiff also cites a blog post entitled, “James Fetzer: Sandy Hook Was A FEMA Drill In Which Nobody Died, for an Anti-Gun Agenda” as edited by Robert David Steele, the same prepared for and presented to the President of the United States, which the plaintiff cites by its URL on the website of one Robert David Steele.

FACTS CONCERNING THE PUBLICATIONS COMPLAINED OF

  1. The plaintiff claims to be a private citizen, and not a public figure, which is disproved by the fact that the publication of the defendant Fetzer and Kelley Watt mentioned in paragraph 4 hereof was a literary answer to the plaintiff’s published article entitled “Our Grief Denied. The Twisted Cruelty of Sandy Hook Hoaxers,” which was published as a commentary in The Hartford Courant on July 25, 2014, still available on line. By thus staking out his position in public, as he has done on several occasions, the plaintiff has established himself as a public figure.
  2. Likewise, the claims of the plaintiff regarding the ostensible death certificate of N. P. mentioned in paragraph 3 hereof were public argumentation which established the plaintiff as a public figure.
  3. The copy of the death certificate circulated by the plaintiff, the same mentioned in the last two lines of paragraph 3 hereof, is materially different from the death certificate said to be prepared by the State of Connecticut, among other things in that the copy circulated by the plaintiff has no file number, no state seal, is different in color and texture, and includes text which was plainly enough photo-shopped. The said features of the circulated copy substantiate the conclusion of the defendant Fetzer that the purported death certificate of N. P. is inauthentic and fake.
  4. As reported on pages 182-183 in the publication mentioned in the last two lines of paragraph 3 hereof, the type is clearly smaller in Box 3 than in the rest of the page. Moreover, a capital A in Box 12, Box 22, and Box 33 has a small flag in the pinnacle, yet the capital A in Box 12, Box 22, Box 26, Box 39, and Box 46 does not have a small flag in the pinnacle, which indicates fabrication and fakery.
  5. Again as reported on pages 182-183 in the publication mentioned in the last two lines of paragraph 3 hereof, the spacing between “N” and “o” in Box 1 and Box 7 are clearly different, which indicates fabrication and fakery.
  6. Again as reported on pages 182-183 in the publication mentioned in the last two lines of paragraph 3 hereof, the “N” in Box 1 and the “N” in Box 26, are clearly not the same, which indicates fabrication and fakery.
  7. Again as reported on pages 182-183 in the publication mentioned in the last two lines of paragraph 3 hereof, the spacing between “S” and “a” in Box 1 is clearly not the same as the spacing between “S” and “a” in Box 11, which indicates fabrication and fakery.
  8. Again as reported on pages 182-183 in the publication mentioned in the last two lines of paragraph 3 hereof, the printing of the name “Pozner” in Box 1 is clearly different from the name “Pozner” in Box 20, which indicates fabrication and fakery.
  9. Because of the variation in spacing and fonts in the copy of the death certificate circulated by the plaintiff and the copy said to be certified by the State of Connecticut, herein above described in paragraphs 8 through 13 hereof, if the latter is the same as the former as insisted by the plaintiff, the latter is most likely inauthentic and a fake prepared as such by the State of Connecticut, as the defendant Fetzer believes.
  10. Over and above the direct proofs of fabrication presented in the publication identified in paragraph 4 hereof, additional evidence is covered in “Sandy-Hook-Collected Memoranda (2018),” tiny URL: http://tinyurl.com/SH-POTUS, which provides extensive additional indirect proof of fabrication and fakery by the plaintiff and/or the State of Connecticut by demonstrating that the school had already been closed, and was not open on December 14, 2012; that there were no students in the school on the day of the alleged shooting, and that the incident was part of a two-day FEMA exercise to promote gun control in which nobody died, which implies that death certificates for any must be fabrications. Among other things, the defendant Fetzer asserts the facts in paragraphs 16 through 28 in behalf of himself and his co-defendants, much of which is reported in said Chapter 11 in the work mentioned the paragraph 4 hereof, to wit:
  11. An aerial photograph of the parking lot of the school at Sandy Hook on December 14, 2012, reveals that there were no blue and white signage or parking spaces for the handicapped as required for an open facility under state and federal laws and regulations implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act, and thus confirms that the school  was  not  open  on  December 14, 2012.
  12. Although the ground temperature was 28 degrees Fahrenheit, no heat or steam was rising from the roof of the school building on December 14, 2012, probably because the boilers in the heating system were dysfunctional from lack of use since the year 2008.
  13. In the center two rows in the parking lot, all parked vehicles faced the building itself, in violation of driving instructions visible from the road itself.
  14. A credible witness contacted the United States Department of Education, and was told that on December 14, 2012, there had been a drill, that no children had died, and that the drill had been conducted to promote gun control.
  15. Gathered in published works, certain photographs show the furnishing of an empty house said to have been the residence of Adam Lanza mentioned in paragraph 2 hereof, and a second series of photographs of refurbishing the school to serve as the stage, including one of a SWAT vehicle present before the claimed shooting incident that day. That the photograph was taken prior to the event is discernible, because a series of four windows in Classroom #10, which were conspicuously shot up after the incident, are still clearly intact.
  16. Certain citizen journalists have found the FEMA manual for a two-day Mass Casualty Drill Involving Children at Sandy Hook, under the auspices of the United States Department of Homeland Security, the same expected to begin in the morning of December 13, 2012, and ending around midnight on December 13, 2012, then to be evaluated the next day. The said manual was published by the defendant Fetzer, among other places in an appendix in both versions of the book referenced in paragraph 4 hereof.
  17. Images broadcast from the scene of the alleged shooting on December 12, 2012, confirm that the incident was a FEMA exercise, including a sign which read, “Everyone must check in,” portable toilets, pizza and bottled water nearby to feed participants, and persons with name tags on lanyards.
  18. There was no surge of EMTs into the building, no string of ambulances to fetch injured or dead persons, as would have occurred if the shooting incident had occurred as the plaintiff claims.
  19. During his press conference on December 14, 2012, Wayne Carver, M. D., Medical Examiner for the State of Connecticut, stated that parents would not be allowed to see the bodies of their deceased children, which was a violation of applicable medical protocols.
  20. The final report on Sandy Hook by the Danbury state’s attorney in and for the State of Connecticut offers no proof that anyone died at Sandy Hook and does not establish a causal nexus that ties the alleged shooter, Adam Lanza mentioned in paragraph 2 hereof, to the weapons he supposedly used or to the victims he is said to have killed.
  21. Recent research published as a video entitled “Sandy Hook Update: Tracy loses, Wolfgang wins. The Deep State Strikes Back,” and other videos reveal that casualties on December 14, 2012, were fictions who existed only in the form of photographs, — among other things, that Noah Pozner was a fictitious person created out of photographs of a person who has been represented as his older step brother Michael Vabner.
  22. A photograph showing what appears to be a policewoman herding a string  of  children to safety, published around the world, was preceded by a second photograph, taken by the same photographer, and showing many parents present, casually looking on, as the policewoman in charge rearranges the kids, replacing a little girl in a pink sweater at the head of the line with a taller boy with a dark sweater and blue jeans to get a better shot, — a photograph to which the plaintiff refers as “lounging at the massacre.” This photograph is journalistic theatre, because there would have been no time to call parents to Sandy Hook Elementary School, had the incident here in question been a genuine emergency.
  23. Just as “Noah Pozner” appears to be a fiction, the plaintiff, styling himself “Leonard Pozner” appears to be a fiction as well, inasmuch as searches of national databases for persons by the name have been unsuccessful. Other research and investigation by the defendant Fetzer and a colleague suggests that the plaintiff is the father of Michael Vabner, and that his real name is “Reuben Vabner,” as the defendant Fetzer believes to be the case.
  24. This suit has been brought for the illicit purpose of intimidation to prevent public knowledge of the truth concerning the events at Sandy Hook, and not for genuine legal relief for actionable harm done, and is therefore an actionable abuse of process. The defendant Fetzer reserves for himself and his co-defendants the options to counterclaim for abuse of process and/or to seek relief under Section 802.05 and/or under Section 895.044 of Wisconsin Statutes.

WHEREFORE, the defendant Fetzer demands that the plaintiff take nothing, that the complaint be dismissed, and that he be granted such further protection and remedy as may be necessary and proper, and allowed by law. He prays as well for like protection of his co- defendants, as is indispensable to protection of himself.

Dated:                                                                                                                                                

JAMES FETZER, PRO SE

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus on the Duluth Campus of the University of Minnesota and co-founder with Mike Palecek of moonrockbooks.com. Should anyone be disposed to support the legal efforts involved here, they are welcome to visit the site, to which a donate button has recently been added.

 

Please follow and like us:

42 thoughts on “THE SANDY HOOK “POZNER v. FETZER” LAWSUIT FOR DUMMIES”

    1. Agree. These hoaxtards are taking things to ridiculous heights. Defamation? That is just Libel or slander. Stating that Sandy Hook was a hoax for gun control and that maybe some people were actors is not defamation. It is freedom of speech. Alex Jones is being sued for the same thing, eLIEzer Pozner is claiming that his voice on the matter is causing people to threaten and harass him and some of the other family members. He is seeking $1,000,000 in damages since he claims he has to constantly move is residence. All Alex Jones has to do is have the judge remand that eLIEzer appear in court and he will drop the ase like he did towards Wolfgang Halbig LoL. I feel bad for Alex Jones he is losing his Apple account, Facebook, Twitter and Spotify. Paypal also suspended his account which he has had since 2000 where he sells nutritional supplements, fluoride free toothpaste and Infowars-branded items. eLIEzer’s lawsuit should have no effect on any of those things. The censorship is ridiculous. I hope Youtube loses many channels that were bringing them in income. You can’t speak about Sandy Hook, Parkland, Las Vegas, Virginia Reporter Shooting (Andy Parker is in cahoots with eLIEzer) Orlando Pulse Shooting, San Bernadino and many more. Speech is no longer free online. They want all your info but you can’t speak your mind. It literally is not hurting anyone. Only one person threatened eLIEzer over the phone and that was Lucy Richards. She served her 5 months in jail as punishment to pleading guilty. (Do yu know Keith Johnson made a video when that first happened blaming me for the phone calls. I sound nothing like the old lady. I have the thickest NY accent ever and eLIEzer has no effect on me. He is a big cry baby.

      1. Jim Fetzer is accusing Lenny Pozner for faking his son’s death certificate which is defamation. That’s the whole reason why Lenny Pozner is suing him!

  1. The answer posted above sounds more like your radio show than the clear, concise and coherent thoughts you usually articulate. Also, why the prayer for dismissal, no counterclaim?

    1. spoonful: Jim’s response is powerful, with game-changing consequences for public verdict after factual documentation. You need to read again: “The defendant Fetzer reserves for himself and his co-defendants the options to counterclaim for abuse of process and/or to seek relief under Section 802.05 and/or under Section 895.044 of Wisconsin Statutes.”

      Prayer is wise, as leading activists are targeted by our opponents. Learn the history that includes targeting of JFK, MLK, RFK, and hundreds of others. You should contribute your prayers, if that’s something you conclude helpful.

        1. In context that Jim goes to court with the breakthrough possibility to reveal comprehensive facts as powerful as the King family did in their civil trial finding the US government guilty with overwhelming evidence, the King family and Martin Pepper (that trial’s attorney, and Martin’s friend) came to the conclusion that the motive to kill Martin was his plan to occupy D.C. during the summer of ’68 until the Vietnam War was ended, with those funds redirected to end poverty in the US. Documentation: https://carlbherman.blogspot.com/2018/04/corbett-report-51-minute-video-on-mlk.html

          I appreciate your well-thought analyses, fellist/Nick.

          Back to Jim’s opening with Sandy Hook: as Truth moves more broadly into the hearts and minds of the US public, our .01% opponents will be forced into more desperate moves that seem more and more dangerous to them losing narrative control. If we stand that Life is fair (karma, loving God, whatever), then all we have to do is keep moving forward for Truth. This is all we have in our own hands and voices to choose, and we will do our best 🙂

  2. How much money was solicited in donations from this event?
    It must be many millions of dollars. If what you say is true and
    no one died wouldn’t they all be guilty of committing major fraud?

    I see them locking people up for lying on GOFUNDME to
    steal a few hundred dollars and yet these people got millions
    of dollars.

    It seems to me some serious jail time and restitution would be in
    order for them, including the then sitting president who swore
    an oath to uphold and defend the constitution not try to subvert
    it based on a fabricated story.

    Hopefully, you can question them under oath and find out. Not that
    I believe they would ever show up. I bet the suit will be dropped.

    1. Above all, Putative Pozner does NOT want his submissions looked at too carefully and comprehensively. Unless things could be \”managed\” by the judiciary, no way Pozner shows. Of course, Pozner may not exist. I just can\’t see where the plaintiff would want to show his face in public. Then again, let\’s not forget how James Tracy\’s case was \”handled\”. Talk about a raw deal, a bogus deal! Ah, yes. Good ol\’ Broward County guarantees everybody a square deal.
      In this case, the plaintiff could ask for a health related delay in proceedings. Could be months, let\’s not forget many people have involvement in this case. One thing for certain, the Deep State can\’t afford to lose this case so they\’ll do whatever they can to tilt the scales.

  3. In all cases like the ”’deaths”’ at Sandy Hook, there would be automatic Wrongful Death lawsuits.

    But there were none.

    I think we all know why.!!! During any Wrongful Death Trial there is …..DISCOVERY…that is the answer.

    1. All they need is for the judge to remand eLIEzer to appear in court and the case will be dropped like he did with the case against Wolfgang Halbig. eLIEzer did not want to show his face. He thought his attorney was going to handle the whole proceedings and he was WRONG

  4. Of course, if the court process shows that Jim’s position is the rock of Gibraltar, and IF Pozner shows at all, this will necessarily implicate many, many people who were part of this ruse. If the government and various intelligence agencies were able to hide travesties like the JFK assassination, the killings of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy, rest assured they can stonewall this case. Hayshakers were not behind Sandy Hook, this most likely came from on-high in the hierarchy of the Deep State. There are unanswered questions to SH, like the silence of the populace in Newtown, this is a major mystery. One can only hope that the judicial process is fair and impartial.Then again, is the Supreme Court fair and impartial? Are judges chosen on the basis of their impartiality? Not! The farce starts at the top and works its way down the chain.It culminates in the fact judges are chosen for their political leanings, not their impartiality.
    We can only hope this is a fair court and a fair judge.How many people truly believe this case will be adjudicated totally impartially?

    1. Well said, Bahmi; thank you. I praise Jim for this powerful opportunity to “play this game at court” that points to a Founders’ gift that “We the People” as jury will be the ones to determine the facts. Will the “court” be slanted or fixed? That’s a challenge Jim’s legal advisors will help address, with their “best game” to do the best possible given whatever circumstances unfold.

      As always, we stand for comprehensive and objective facts to demonstrate what happened. This is an extraordinary opening where our opponents have chosen a venue for factual discovery and public documentation. We’ll play this game, this is what we want, what we’ve “trained” for, and what will win for humanity.

      Thank you, Jim, for leading in this unexpected breakthrough 🙂

    1. I respectfully disagree about the legal strategy – as I understand it, the crux of the claim centers around the professor’s admitted statements regarding the fraudulent nature of the death certificate – since the truth or falsity of those statements is an affirmative defense, why not just focus on the facts related to the easily proven falsity of the document? Moreover, if the Professor’s claim is true, and the Pozner character has called upon the State of Wisconsin to award him damages under false pretenses, such actions constitute what is sometimes referred to as “extrinsic fraud” or “fraud upon the court”. A nice case illustrative of this doctrine in the context of an ongoing matter is Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115 (1st Cir. 1989). In Wisconsin, a case kinda close is Jones v. Courtyard Apartments, LLP, 326 Wis. 2d 266, 787 N.W.2d 60. You could move to have the case dismissed because it is based on evidence known by the plaintiff to be manufactured. At the least, you could start with immediate discovery requests. Yes, I see the professor reserved his rights to counterclaim, but it sounds like advice from friendly counsel who is cautious, timid and un-clever. On the other hand, here is a nice case for an abuse of process counterclaim: Keller v. Patterson, 343 Wis. 2d 569, 580, 819 N.W.2d 841, 846 (“One who uses a legal process, whether criminal or civil, against another to accomplish a purpose for which it is not designed is liable to the other for the pecuniary loss caused thereby.”).

  5. Why are you so fixated six years later on the lanyards? Go to any workplace in the US and you’ll see employees wearing ID badges. Office buildings, schools, hospitals, churches all use them. Those people came there from work, so it would make sense for them to have the ID badges with them.

    In an active shooting, there is no surge of EMT’s, Halbig has a cop(only for less than two years)should know this. The scene has to be secured before any medical personnel are allowed in. Once it was safe enough, one of the cops escorted in three medics. that’s how it works tin those situations.

    At Columbine, the Red Cross brought water for the first responders. So having food/water being brought in for them at Sandy Hook is not odd. Same for the porta potties, where were they all supposed to go to the bathroom? It’s just your speculation that the images showing the sign, food, water, porta potties are from before the 14th. The only evidence you show is that there were leaves still on trees in December. Any internet search will show you articles about leaves staying on trees well into December, it is very common.

    Your speculation will not stand up in court. The besst you can do is show blurry photos of room 10 that you think show it undamaged. That’s all you have to say the school was staged the night before. you will need a clear, up close, unedited photo of the undamaged room 10. Something that you do not have, nor will ever have.

    Why do you still show that Noah Pozner transition when it’s clear that his and Michael Vabner’s ears do not match?

    1. They are one and the same person. It’s embarrassing when you post rubbish like this, but I know it’s the best you can do. There is nothing “blurry” about the photos of the windows of Classroom #10. Anyone who takes this guy seriously needs to go back and review, “Sandy Hook Updated: Tracy loses, Wolfgang wins. The Deep State Strikes Back!” linked above. It’s all there clear as a bell and in spades. The building was in deplorable condition inside and out and was not even compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act, which means that it could not have been legally operating as a public school on 14 December 2012.

      1. Not blurry? The room 10 photo in your book was cropped from one of the other photos. it\’s a parking lot photo of a vehicle, with the classroom window out of focus in the background. It was cropped from one of the photos of the Toyota Sienna van, either the Farr exterior photos or the Meehan parking lot photos in the report. In both photos the window in the background, out of focus. So once it\’s cropped, it\’s going to look blurry.

        Post photos on your blog of Michael Vabner and Noah Pozner and let your readers judge if their ears match.

        1. For proof that “Bob” is a fraud, download NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015) for free as a pdf by putting its title in your browser. One benefit of the download is that, unlike the original 1st edition, which was only black-and-white, the images are all in color. Compare the key image on page 148, where you can see the SWAT vehicle already present and the string of four windows just above its roof, where you can compare them with page 149, where they are obviously shot up, and on page 154, where they are clearly intact. The latter image corresponds to their condition in the key photo on page 148, which means that “Bob” appears to be shilling for the Deep State.

  6. BTW the headline photo in Jim’s post is totally staged. The parents of the kids are standing and watching. Remember there was supposed to the a crazed killer in the school. Wouldn’t the kids be running for their terrified parents?
    Given the hour of the ”attack”, I did a study of this photo to calculate the length of the shadows of the people. It appears that this photo was taken a month or so before the event day and at around 11 AM or 11:30 AM.

    1. The \”evacuation\” photo was taken October 8 2012 according to the meta data on the photos, Some of the children\’s photo\’s went back as far as 2008. This was carefully planned for years but poorly executed. It was a hot mess the minute it aired on TV and the photo\’s started appearing online. We had no evacuation, a school not in operations. The Lanza\’s neighbor and a random FBI agent running around in the woods. A 112lbs 6\’0 man who allegedly had asperger\’s or Autism depending on who you talk to, and sensory disorder (he allegedly could not touch anything metal like doorknobs and he has a major sensitivity to sun light where he had to place black trash bags on his bedroom windows, yet could play the light flashing loud game Dance Dance Revolution for hours on end at the mall) carrying an arsenal or weapons weighing half his weight climb shoot 26 people with a 99% accuracy rate. Trained Snipers don\’t have that perfect accuracy. Then Lanza allegedly shot himself in the head but the bullet wound entered the rear of his head. There were no kids being evacuated from he school. Just people walking in circles at the fire house. Then a bus driver just randomly left 4 0r 6 (depends on which Gene Rosen Interview you watch) kids at Gene Rosen\’s residence. Gene didn\’t know if he was coming back from getting bagels, waiting for his grand kids, his wife or was just watching his creepy cat. Why a bus driver would drop kids off at some random strangers home is beyond me. Gene was spotted on camera at the fire house when he allegedly had the children from Victoria Soto\’s class in his home. Was he with the kids or wandering the fire house like seen on LIVE TV. Lets not forget the PLEASE CHECK IN FEMA sign caught on camera, or the color coded lanyards that the parents were all wearing around their neck (This is Drill procedure) Lets not forget that Sandy Hook is a high class neighborhood. All the parents had nice careers yet everyone was dressed in jeans, sneakers sweats and sweatshirts. Not indicative of a family member leaving work to head down to the school in a rush emergency . Add in the cases of water bottles, dozens of pizzas ordered and the Port A Potty\’s all lined up on Dickerson Dr.Everyone was so calm, walking slowly around Dickerson Dr for the camera\’s or circling in and out of the firehouse. No frantic parents wondering if their child is safe. If this happened at my daugher\’s school I would be a hot mess, frantically trying to find out any info I can. I would be crying hysterically not showing no emotion or smiling. now that I have been rambling let me end with the gun used to shot Nancy Lanza and the children in Victoria Soto\’s class did not have Adams DNA or fingerprints on it. How does one shoot a gun and your DNA is nowhere to be found. His finger prints where no where to be found, not on the barrel, not on the trigger, no finger prints on the bullets he touch to load the gun. And one last thing. I can get into the crazy acting of Medical Examiner Wayne Carver but we all so his display of crazy antics. He kept stating the long gun was used to shoot the children, yet the log gun was found in the trunk of Nancy Lanza\’s vehicle. We see on live TV the officer opening the trunk and picking the long rifle up and placing it back down. Since Adam allegedly killed himself in the classroom or hallway depending on who you interview, he couldn\’t possibly put the gun back in the vehicle.The Long rifle or gun as Wayne Carver calls it was never used in the alleged shooting. Mr. Carver went on to describe the triage tent as a \”Magnificent Thing\” and then he laughed uncontrollably and started wavering his head up and down and back and forth like a lunatic. When questioned about idetifying the bodies Wayne Carver stated that the parents were not allowed to see the children to identify them. Instead he was going to take photos. He went on to state that photos are easier on the families and that he has a very good photographer who can do amazing things. What amazing things would be done to a photo? Wayne Carver then stated (Off hand because i don\’t remember exactly) But he stated something to the effect that the town of Newtown better hope this all doesn\’t come crashing down on their heads. Was he telling us something? Sandy Hook was an elaborate hoax that was planned for years in advance but was executed so badly. Robbie Parker Laughing and smiling before he gets into character for his interview. Just one day after his daughter was allegedly slaughtered. Who would be smiling, laughing and joking? Photo here of him smiling before his press confrence https://blackeyenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Robbie-Parker-Smiling.png Lets not forget that Barrack Obama is photographed holding Emilie the day after the shooting. She is wearing the same dress and same shoes. I don\’t believe that they put the outfit on younger child Madeline and it fit to a tee. Here is the photo https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/Barack_Obama_with_relatives_of_Emilie_Parker.jpg Also lets ot forget that there are no photos of the Parker Family with Emilie in it. Allison Parker photoshopped Emilie into every photo that was released to the public On to the Pozners- Michael Vabner walks away from his mom when she is seen on TV being told about Noah. He doesn\’t hug her, kiss her, comfort her in anyway, He walks away as soon as the officer began to speak to her. eLIEzer was wandering around like a bumbling idiot with a dumb look on his face. He too wasn\’t crying, showed no sadness, just walked away from his wife and walked round the area in circles. I want to mention too that Noah died twice, once allegedly in Sandy Hook and a second time in Peshwar Pakistan, Not only did he die twice he was shown on a banner with the other kids who were killed, then again his photo was held up by a woman and they even gave him a new name which was Huzaifa Huxaifa Photo here : https://www.imgrumweb.com/post/BVGxOlBAMCF DMCA Filling whack Job eLIEzer didn\’t even go after the BBC who posted the photos to have them removed? Why? He does it to anyone who mentions his kids name or shows his photo for a millisecond. He never bothered to have the photos removed. He did have girl by the name of Tiffany Moser (she once was a sandy hook hoaxers and was all into the research until she needed eLIEers help so she flipped and became a disHONR Fraud) Tiffany contacted a man on facebook who had a dedication video created for those who died in Peshwar. She interrogated this man who had no idea where the photo came from or who the person was. SHe demanded he take the video down. He wasn\’t threatened by her and kept the video up. One last thing to say. eLIEzer who claims he has had to move several times because he is being harrassed and getting death threats has over 30 domain names registered o him under en Pozner. Many are peoples personal names or Youtube channel names. He posts the peoples phone numbers, address, workplace, family member names, anything he an dig up. He even had someone hack another person\’s icloud and had one of his flunkies post a picture of the woman\’s 3 year old daughter naked in the tub and a picture of her license. ELIEzer is one big hypocrite. He can\’t handle the heat but can dish it out and think he is invincible. The FBI is aware of his domains that he has obtained and they re currently investigating them. Karma is a Bitch and Sandy Hook was a big fat HOAX

  7. We pray that Jim is able to make his case in court, although it is likely that Pozner will drop this lawsuit just as he did Halbig’s. These are designed to cost the defendants time and money, but if Pozner drops a second time, he should be sued for filing frivolous lawsuits.

    I hope Jim will present the Dec 13 2012 time-stamp (one day prior to the incident) of the Newtown Bee’s photo of the children leaving Sandy Hook Elementary, which is a smoking gun that it was staged. I also hope that he will present the other smoking guns–various documents for food deliveries and requests to governmental agencies in the 2011-2012 school year (the year before the Sandy Hook incident) that listed the address of Sandy Hook Elementary School as 375 Fan Hill Road in Monroe CT–the address of the supposedly abandoned Chalk Hill Middle School. This proves, along with satellite images, that Sandy Hook students had been there for at least since August of 2011 and were nowhere near the old Sandy Hook Elementary on Dec 14 2012.

    1. All Jim needs to do is have the judge order that eLIEzr appear in court. He will drop the case just like he did Wolfgangs. eLIEzer has so may current lawsuits. He is suing Ji, Alex Jones for defamation. Which is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. Alex and Jim are entitled to Freedom of Speech something defamation, slander or libel doesn’t fall under. eLIEzer is claiming that Alex’s claims of Sandy Hook being a hoax is getting people to harass and stalk him with death threats. He is full of shit. o one has made death threats or even harassed him except that one lady Lucy Richards who served her 5 months in jail. There has been no proof of any other claims. How about eLIEzer owns up to the 30 plus domains registered to Len Pozner that are in peoples real names, have their addresses, phone numbers, employment, family members names and number on them. eLIEzer had one of his flunkies named Doug Maguire hack a woman’s icloud and posted a picture of her 3 year old naked in the tub. He also obtained a copy of her license which was photographed on her icloud as well and he posted it to his domain in her name and to a video hosting site. He can dish it out but can’t take it back. His delusional mind thinks he is going to be awarded $1,000,000 from his Alex Jones lawsuite. All the cases will be thrown out of court

    2. When Wolfgang tweeted those invoices, he unknowingly debunked himself:

      https://imgur.com/a/cMnhbzW

      On the right it clears shows a modified date of 1/02/13. Meaning they changed the database to reflect the new address for the school.

      It also says:

      “NOW LOCATED IN THE OLD CHALK HILL SCHOOL IN MONROE”

      Once the database was changed, the school address would read Chalk Hill, not Sandy Hook

      Since you mentioned satellite images, here is one from 3/29/12 of Sandy Hook. Does not look abandoned does it? Can even see kids at the playground:

      https://imgur.com/a/bTFkZpc

  8. I am pleased to see this article and see that a case has actually been brought. I am glad Dr. Fetzer is calling this bluff.

    “PLAINTIFF: Since the death certificate that Leonard Pozner gave to Kelley Watt does not differ “in any material respect” from the death certificate certified by the State of Connecticut, it must be authentic and therefore cannot be a fake, a forgery or a fabrication, as the Defendant claims; and, as a consequence, he has defamed the Plaintiff;”

    This claim of the Plaintiff sounds very odd.

    I am under the distinct understanding that “Leonard Pozner” has substantial, basically unlimited, financial backing for this
    maneuver and that the money flow to the plaintiff’s attorneys is ultimately from the perpetrators of this evil and false event.

    This is a chessboard move by our powerful Shadow Government.

    P.S.
    Was unclear WHAT DATE the “defamation” is claimed to have taken place.

  9. Oy Vey! Lenny Pozner sued the school and tried to blame the deaths of those children on the murdered teachers and principal. Fortunately the judge saw through Pozner\’s scheme and threw him and his attorney out of court. Bankrupt and butt hurt he\’s been trying to sue anyone and everyone to recover those shekels. Lenny likes to manufacture lawsuits.

    He who is greedy for unjust gain brings trouble on his household.
    https://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-news-sandy-hook-lawsuit-0109-story.html

    1. How do you know Putative Pozner is flat busted? How do you know he has hired his own counsel when it’s likely the head perps and high rollers in the crime are likely behind hiring legal eagles? Who hired the secret vendor for Porta Potties? Who made the deal with the demolition company to have their employees sign lifelong secrecy agreements? Putative Pozner? Balderdash, I think not!

  10. The great thing for you about having your old blog shut down is that all your nonsense that was debunked on there in the comment section is long gone so you can post your rubbish once again and unsuspecting readers won’t know that it has been debunked over and over again! Once again: Those are NOT the same students in that picture that you claim they are. They don’t even have the same haircut/face shape! Egad!

    1. This counts as stupid on so many grounds! Let me count the ways. What is the probability that, if this had been a real shooting, someone would have called parents to come to the scene? What is the probability that, if this had been a real shooting and parents had been called to the scene, that they would stand around watching while a photographer took several photographs? What is the probability that, if this had been a real shooting and parents had been called to the scene, that they would not snatch their children at the earliest opportunity and “get the hell out of Dodge”? The attempts to explain away the massive proof that this was a FEMA drill presented as mass murder continue unabated to this day–as this post displays!

      1. Parents would not just grab the kids, because it was safer for a cop to bring them out. The kids were also witnesses, so they needed to be questioned.

  11. Virtually every social media accounts Lenny claims is threatening and harassing him actually belong to Lenny and his volunteers. Lenny is manufacturing his own evidence to use in court and to solicit donations from sympathetic parties. We have infiltrated his group and have turned over the evidence to prove it.

    Please report Lenny and his charity to the IRS and other scam watch groups. Stalking, harassing and making false copyright claims is against Federal Law. It is likely that the only beneficiary of Lenny’s charity is Lenny himself.

    1. First of all, we should keep in mind that the court that accepted this case filing and the law firm for the Plaintiff may know that they are promoting an unidentified false entity into the legal system. That makes them accomplices to this illegality.

      It is a shame for the defendants to even have to respond to this miscarriage of justice.

      “Virtually every social media accounts Lenny claims is threatening and harassing him actually belong to Lenny and his volunteers.”

      That rings very true to me.

      “We have infiltrated his group and have turned over the evidence to prove it.”

      It would be nice if individuals could report Lenny games to this group of “We” and told exact steps to formally report to IRS.

      “It is likely that the only beneficiary of Lenny’s charity is Lenny himself.”

      I believe Lenny’s Shadow Government (don’t like the term “deep state”) sponsors would like to have it APPEAR that Lenny is an individual scamster just looking to make money for himself. That is great cover story in case someone gets closer to getting legal action against him and, if Lenny is a real person, he would be then dropped like a hot potato by his sponsors and left to fend for himself.

      The entire GO FUND ME and like entities are increasingly shown to be money laundering operations and a mechanism to pay off certain individuals who participate in the Shadow Government’s deception games.

      Any donations that accrue to “Lenny” are just “gravy” and a sideline benefit to the real game.

    2. I don’t think the “shadow government” would trust Putative Pozner to run his own defense, hire lawyers, etc. There is way too much at stake. Remember, the sum totality of perps cannot afford to lose this case and it would uncover many more complicits. If one of the other chaos actors suddenly was called to court, likewise he/she would need legal help that might have an “in” with the “right” people. The top perps need all the insulation they can get and individuals like Poz would not be allowed to choose his own representation.

  12. Jim, you have shown tremendous courage (along with Wolfgang and others) by exposing this fraud. The very idea you allow “characters” like Bob to post here goes to your integrity…certainly not “his”.
    I pray this goes to court and if so, if handled well, it has the potential to bring down this thing we laughingly call a government. As strange and impossible as that sounds I truly believe it’s feasible.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *