Steve Cooley...responds to my letters! Typical snake in the legal profession...

At long last, Steve Cooley (District Attorney pining for loftier climbs on the political landscape) responded to two letters I fired off by U.S. post weeks ago (one by certified mail obviously got his attention).

Cooley finally got off his fat a** - and the campaign trail - long enough to earn part of the check he draws from the City's coffers each week.

It wasn't until I published an expose on the District Attorney's office that the self-serving DA bothered to give me the courtesy of a reply.

Til now.

Post: 05/03/10

http://ijulian.blogspot.com/2010/05/roman-polanskisallegations-about-steve.html

Maybe all the comments on the post uttered up by his enemies was starting to make Cooley nervous?

Initially, I contacted Mr. Cooley to inform him about incompetent staff at the DA's office, intimidation tactics (employees in the DA's office have been twisting arms to extract money from victims under threat of prosecution), a refusal by staff to correct records when the true facts and evidence are submitted to the DA's office, a conspiracy to cover-up worker miscoduct, etc.

In essence, citizens are being victimized by power-mad lawyers looking to move up in the DA's office..

Mr. Cooley's response was typical of a lawyer in that it was brimming with lies and deceit, vigorous attempts to twist the facts (to his advantage), rife with legal hokus-pokus and distortions of the truth, and shameful posturing calculated to save his own a**.

Typical of these sharks (the attorneys who wear the black hats) Mr. Cooley side-stepped the issues which would have landed him on dangerous ground.

Of course, these issues related to the criminal conduct of his staff.

I guess he didn't want to leave any smoking guns lying around.

Also, he failed to address the issue of his staff ignoring my letters, and engaging in threatening and harassing conduct, which may warrant investigation by the FBI.

Cooley couldn't utter up one word in his staff's defense.

Why?

Because in view of the evidence in my possession, there is no way out for his employees.

The arguments he presented on a couple of other matters demonstrated to me that Mr. Cooley does not have a "head" for Law (or anything else for that matter).

His flimsy excuses - and attempts to wash away the truth - was a ludicrous smoke-and-mirrors trick to scare me off.

As Judge Judy would say:

"Do I have stupid written on my forehead?"

A snake should be tattoed on Mr. Cooley's.

Footnote

On June 7th a response letter was mailed to Cooley by U.S. Post (witnessed by a 3rd party).

I'll keep readers posted on Cooley's continued efforts to protect his staff and corrupt the system.

Polanski was hood-winked by lying cheating DA staff!

http://www.thetattler.biz

Charlie Sheen...volatile TV actor enters plea of "not guilty"! Circus court on horizon...

Treat women as you would have them treat you, Charlie!

Surprise!

Charlie Sheen copped a "not guilty" plea when he was in court yesterday.

If you recall, the "Two and a Half Men" star was booked for domestic violence charges (menacing, criminal mischief and assault) arising from an incident over the Christmas holidays in Aspen, Colorado.

During the course of a 911 emergency call, Sheen's wife - Brooke Mueller - alleged that the high-profile actor put a knife to her throat during a quarrel and threatened to kill her if she sought a divorce.

On the heels of the incident, Sheen admitted himself to a rehab program here in Southern California, which triggered a shut-down on production at the studio where the  popular TV Sitcom was filming (and landing top ratings for the Network).

For weeks there has been speculation - by TMZ and legitimate news outlets, too - that Sheen would go for a plea bargain.

Not true!

Although Mr. Sheen has admitted arguing with his high-strung emotional wife on the day of the incident, the pint-sized actor has denied threatening Ms. Mueller.

The Judge presiding over the proceedings has set a court date for July 21st (2010).

On that date, I expect a media circus will descend on the courthouse, unless authorities manage to stop posturing and agree to equitable terms Sheen may be inclined to accept in the interests of judicial economy.

News at 11!

 

A stiff di*k has no conscience!

http://www.thetattler.biz

Christian Bale...shocking tirade on set jolts the biz! No. 1 a**hole...

Bale a fu**ing mean Hombre?

An audio recording of Christian Bale throwing a fit on the set of his latest movie had tongues wagging this morning around the Nation.

In fact, disc jockeys were having a field day with the clip - recorded months ago - that TMZ posted on their web site over the week-end.

Allegedly, the director of cinematography stepped into the set to adjust a light - at which point - Bale let into him.

The audio tape reveals that the surprised crew member was not only subjected to verbal abuse, but physical threats, as well.

And, the spoiled actor's outburst wasn't just a short little tantrum, either.

The shocking tape lasts about three and a half minutes and is so riddled with foul language, that after "bleeps" were edited in to block out the offensive swear words, there wasn't much left on tape for the curious to make hide-nor-tail of.

Clever staff at one radio station seized on the opportunity bright and early this morning to hold a little contest on air.

"How many "F" bombs did Christian Bale hurl," one jock queried his audience.

"Call us right now and see if you can correctly put your tongue on the number."

Of course, it is not unusual for a crew member - especially a director of cinematography - to step into a hot set while a scene is being rehearsed or filmed to tweak a light or some such thing.

So what was the big fuss?

Well, a few actors in the business have a problem with concentration.

Tommy Lee Jones and Joan Collins, for instance, don't like bystanders stepping into their eye line as they are working because it may throw distract them.

Many directors are aware of that and usually make allowances by forewarning the crew and other cast members in advance before an actor arrives on set.

Notwithstanding, Bale's abusive conduct - and the subsequent thorough dressing-down of the crew member - was inappropriate and downright unprofessional.

After swearing at the man, and thoroughly humiliating him in front of everyone present on the movie set, the B-list movie actor threatened to "smash his lights".

Did he mean he was going to trash the light set-ups or was it a veiled threat?

Was Bale implying that he might punch the DP in the face?

It appears that the actor, known for being picky, is a time bomb waiting to go off.

Last year, many in the business were taken aback, when Christian Bale was accused of some violence in a Hotel room overseas.

On that occasion, he narrowly escaped criminal charges for assault.

Many thought the incident was an isolated one brought on my career pressures, or - quite simply - amounted to a squabble with family members that was simply blown out of proportion by his accusers, the media, and so forth and so on.

Even so, the reprehensible behaviour he exhibited in a work-related setting, underscores that Bale clearly has some anger management issues to address!

I am surprised that in view of what went down, that the actor didn't secure the incriminating recording months ago to prevent it from being released to the media at a later date.

In view of the fact the "sound man" is usually considered a tight-knit part of a crew that works closely with the cinematographer, obviously there has been some skullduggery underfoot behind-the-scenes.

Did the DP ask the audio-recorder to put the tape away for safe-keeping?

And, why did it get released now, and not six months ago when the first incident sprung forth in all its ugly fury?

Enquiring minds want to know!

Handsome is as handsome does!

http://www.juilanayrs.com

Albertson's...automated cashiers. Kinks to iron out & a peak into an uncertain future!

In the wee hours of the morning when staff at Albertson's are busy stocking shelves and taking inventory, customers are being urged to use the new "automated cashiers".

At first, the idea was a bit off-putting. What, no service with a smile?

This past week I ventured into the future and gave the new-fangled device a shot.

Fortunately, I started with a simple purchase. God only knows what may have transpired, otherwise.

First, pursuant to the instructions on the screen, I scanned a bottle of reduced-fat milk. Yeah, have to watch the old gut, 'ya know?

When I was asked to input the code for the next item or proceed to pay, I chose the latter option.

At this juncture, I was instructed to place my purchase in a bag.

However, when I sat the milk carton inside of the spacious sack, a rude message popped up on the screen and lamented - "object blocking area" - or something to that effect.

When I plucked the beverage from the open bag (which was neatly nestled into a device to frame it just so at the point of purchase) I was instructed to scan another item or hit the "finish and pay" button.

I tapped the screen to close the sale - at which point - I was given several pay options - debit, credit card, or cash.

Amazingly, when I slipped two crisp dollar bills into the slot, correct change jangled into a small change catch-all basin below the register.

Then, a receipt flew out of a groove, and landed squarely in my sweaty palm!

So, I trundled off with my milk in hand (sans bag) a little bemused by it all.

Would a more complex sale be a snap, too?

For instance, the purchase of produce would require that I input the price per pound, I expect. In that event, I guess shoppers would be wise to carry a pencil and paper around in their cart to jot those prices down.

I wonder, if I fudged on the numbers, would a siren go off to warn management and embarrass me in front of the other customers?

Something else I noticed, too. All the instructions were in medium-sized type way below the natural eyeline on the screen. So, at check out - if you needed glasses to read script - you'd be SOL if you left 'em at home or in the car.

In that event, you'd have to call for assistance, fer sure.

For the most part, it appeared to be a fairly painless experience.

But, I have to wonder...

As we start using automation in various areas of our daily lives, will we start to get lazy? Worse than that, is it wholly possibly that without daily use, we'll slowly lose our faculties to add, count change, or even communicate in idle chit-chat at whim in the check-out line?

Ultimately, will we be replaced one day, too?

Shudder the thought!

I like to think I am one-of-a-kind, irreplaceable.

Yeah, tell that to your boss!

Chuck Palahniuk once said,
"When did the future switch from being a promise to being a threat?"