Sunday, January 31, 2016

Nick Kroll, Tig Notaro, Lavely and Singer, and the City of Los Angeles work together on a frame job

Work in progress.  So much more to do.  

The part that starts on July 9th 2009, and leads to the end is most astounding aspect of this malicious prosecution. 

That is almost done, but as you will see, it will get unbearably sinister, lawless, and complicated. I also have a few documents that I need to access. they are in a broken desktop but I learned a way to get them and will do so ASAP. I dropped some documents I'll need later at the bottom so they only makes sense to me. I didn't remember having them so when I saw them I saved here so I can access them easily

 Part 1
 The allegations as presented in an appeals decision that was posted in November 16th 2009. That date -November 16th 2009- is very relevant as you will see.

b. proving how false the allegations were and how the false narrative was maintained due to the power and pull of Nick Kroll, Lavely and Singer and then the LAPD's corrupt "Threat Management Unit."

Part Two- TMU and getting Mathilde "Tig" Notaro "awarded" with a restraining order through Nick Kroll and Lavely and Singer connections.

b. TMU rejects the case and returns. John Gregozek says, " What could I do. you sued her didn't you." as the answer to the question: How can filed such bogus charges.

Part 3-  Retaliation for defamation complaint and for filing an appeal against Mathilde "Tig" Notaro. Criminal Prosecution- Case 8CA10541

b. the non stop retaliations in the criminal courts for any civil court moves we made or an defense show by me or the public defender. Fudged minute orders and judges, lavely and singer, prosecutors and cops following no law.
The addition of charges. The rejections of plea offer after plea offer.

Part 4- The competency court conspiracy. Division 95. Kafka wouldn't believe it.

b. Martin Boags finds huge exculpatory evidence and what does he do.. add four more bogus charges

c. what those charges were and how they'd be dismissed a month after being added because again I would not accept the plea bargains ... all no jail informal diversion or formal(when they added baseless charges).

The raid. Jail. Division 95. Judge Samantha Jessners, Karla Kerlin, Maria Stratton's and Robert Vanderet's incredible corruption and cruelty.

Part 5- Trial - 2 charges acquitted by judge on oral motion by Alissa Malzman Sterling. Last charge thrown by Alissa Malzman Sterling because as she'd later admit, " I work for the city, Alisa." She didn't admit she threw the charge but all the evidence will prove she did. But despite her efforts to hand the malicious prosecution one charge- Judge Randolph Moore would dismiss that "in the interests of judge. All three dismissals are extremely rare and indicate that the judge understood this was a malicious prosecution.

Part 6- Redressing Grievancesin a system fixed by Marty Singer and Jules Kroll's son, Nick
 b. harassments and circumstances that would lead us to have to flee L.A.

On April 30th 2008 Detective John Gregozek wrote out this report, after being contacted "via phone" by a Mathilde "Tig" Notaro.

Insert original - Willen as witness when proven that she was not there

l 30th 2008   

This parag

On May 1st 2008, Notaro or someone else files this in the Santa Monica Courthouse

May 2 -

Here's May 2nd 2008 blown up.

On May 2nd 2008 Detective Hoffman Serial Number 30708, Defoe Serial Number 27180, and Gregozek(no serial number included) Responded to Notaro's residence. Notaro identified Spitzberg by photograph.

Note: Beyond skimpy on detail. Three Detective from an elite LAPD Unit drive from Downtown L.A to Santa Monica to respond to a residence? Since when do residence's speak or identify people, by one photograph? Was one witness statement ever taken of Notaro. What about those three roommates she listed on the Restraining order. We'll get to those three roommates very soon.

While Three Detectives ponder why a residence is the one to speak to in such instances-

Notaro or her lawyers or someone has filed this with the Santa Monica Court.

You see, Mathilde "Tig" Notaro doesn't just want a restraining order. She wants a special one. The ones reserve for cases so extreme that even the due process benefit of notice be denied the soon to be restrained. But she is not required to fill the required information out because....

This too appears to have been filed on May 5yh


There is a lot of stuff going on this page. But it would take me nearly six years to understand that the most important few lines were these. More exactly the who was there part and the name, Nick Kroll.

page 3

page 4

Page 5 

pg 6

It is not shocking that a judge would grant such an order since temp orders are notoriously rubber stamped( In L.A, at least) but to grant one without notice to me based on these two documents- Where absoltely not one reason is given... Well, how to explain that.

 the earlier one has a case number while the later one does not - which I just don't yet understand

So whomever this judge was granted it to Miss Notaro and we must assume due to the documents- her representatives at the Lavey and Singer Lawfirm

Temporary order pg 1

Page 2

page 4 temp  

OK, no due process. No hearing. Not even notice. Based on violence and stalking. Not just against Notaro but Notaro wants me to be restrained from three men I've never heard of. She will claim these three men -- Kjell Bjorgen, Chris Fairbanks, and Thomas Sharpe-- are her roommates. Implicit in that is that I somehow without any such allegation- pose a threat to these people who reside in her home.

 But there is a hearing to make this CLETS order permanent.

Please note this the entirety of the file when it comes to the request and then the granting of the order. only Notaro's affidavit. No affidavits from the many witnesses she'd then list. 

We found this later, on the back of one of the pages.

But, nothing but this. No police reports. 

If you look at this, which involves the same Police Officers, John Gregozek and the same Lawfirm, Lavely and Singer. Well, you'll see that somethng is not right here.

Ok, so unbenowst to me on August 30th 2008, Notaro contacted Gregozek and he filled out the report seen above. Then on May 2nd 2008 he, Detective Martha Defoe and Detective James Hoffman went to a residence and spoke to it. Somehow Notaro identified me by one photo.  

Here's that again-  

What did this crack team of "Elite" Detectives do next?

No evidence of any other activity pursuant to the "Investigation" for May 3rd or 4th or 5th, but on May 6th 2008, I'd learn much later(because none of this was to be found in the file in the Santa Monica Court) In other words, I was left completely in the dark.

Here we see that Gregozek  interviewed Notaro via telephone and completed an investigative report.

That was not an investgative report. It was the claims of malicious liar, made by phone,  and no investigation was ever conducted by Gregozek as to those allegations.

Evidence: NONE ETC.
Then, he 

 "obtained printed out emails and online forums written by Spitzberg about Notaro from Notaro's attorney, Alison Sivers (note his tendency to misspell her name repeatedly, as you see, even though he knows her very well)

Note: not one of these alleged "emails and forums" were ever presented as evidence. Emails I gave gregozek were exculpatory.

That is  all that Gregozek did in order to "investigate" Notaro claims of stalking or any of her claims. It would turn out that he and Hoffman would actively refuse to talk to anyone but Matilde "Tig" Notaro and Stef Willen by phone, over the course of the entire two years that would follow Notaro's phone call to Gregozek. And he would submit the phone report as gospel, over and over and over again.

According to him, by now he interviewed Notaro "via telephone" then drove to the offices of Lavely and Singer. Then once again he did the via telephone thing and spoke to a Stephanie "Stef" Willen by phone

This is the entirety of what he'd write about his errand boy work for Lavely and Singer and his phone chat with grifter, Stef Willen.

On May 7th 2008 Gregozek and Hoffman came to our door. Read more about it here.

In subsequent search warrants, he'd tell the assorted judge under penalty of perjury this:

Please note that these statement made by Gregozek are lies. He is making things up and he is pretending that he has investigated the claims made to him by Notaro and Willen and that they have been proven true. In fact, they were proven false.

As do his notes which very mysteriously omit my mother completely. Since my mother and sister, though put in separate rooms retold the same set of facts apparently it was't relevant to his assisting Marty Singer and Nick Kroll's dear friend in having whatever they wanted accomplished.

Insert misdemeanor of century and how the "interview" went down.

As of May 7th 2008 there is no indication in any record, that any member of the LAPD's Threat Management Unit engaged in any form of investigation. 

Later though we'd see that John Gregozek did do something between May 7th and May 28th of 2008. He filed this with Judge Gerald Rosenberg's court

Of course I was going to respond to these allegations. Allegations that I, my sister, and my mother(and many potential witnesses)could prove wrong.

insert statement by Gregozek and Hoffman 

But was tracking down these witnesses necessary. according to these detective it was not and so I was sure my response was enough.

write about our meeting and phone call with lawyers etc.

May 28th 2008

PDF "Hearing..

Minutes of that "hearing" 

page 2

Note these things,- substitution of attorney. judge made it last case. . sister was key witness. removed from court. the record has omitted this very important fact. one of Rosenberg's sherrifs told my sister that she had to leave till she testified though this same thing did not apply to Notaro and her "witnesses." When my sister tried to return to court the door was locked. So this was a set up from the begginning.

And, here's the void order granted by Judge Gerald Rosenberg. As you can see Notaro not only listed herself but three roommates, Chris Fairbanks, Thomas Sharpe, and Kjell Bjorgen. For this day Notaro 

So now Gerald Rosenberg had granted Notaro want she wanted... later Notaro and her attorney would describe it as "awarded." He'd done so by fudging the minutes to make it seem as if a key witness wasn't present and he did so without making any effort to notice that Notaro's affidavit and court testimony made it clear that she was doing this maliciously and could not keep one sentence of her affidavit straight. But then we just had two of her statements. Soon we'd have many more.

Next step- Appeal...

What other remedies? What do you do when you suddenly have a ruined record. And worse than that the reason for your moving to Los Angeles has been destroyed by one stranger who has set in motion a character assassination.  For reasons you can't every fully understand, Notaro had decided to turn me into a violent stalker who merited court intervention. 

 We'd find out later about Motions to Reconsider and Void Judgement But at that time... we were told an appeal was the only remedy. It also seemed obvious that Notaro had defamed me, had commited "fraud on the court. Soon with some research it was clear that Malicious prosecution" " Abuse of Process" and Infliction of Emotional harm applied.And so that process began.

On June 29th I filed the notice of appeal.

You had to serve the defendant with Notice of filing so In early July I took the measures required to serve Notaro with "Notice of Appeal," 

 So on July 15th the process server sheriff deputy gave up.

Can't remember the exact details, but judging by the record, she was served and the appeal process was started a short time afterwards.

Next step was the defamation suit and doing whatever it took to clear my name and not to have an ugly and malicious and illegal restraining order on my record.

From May 28th 2008 on I was sure not all was lost. I knew she'd taken measures to have me banned from Largo and The Improv but I imagined that her malice and hatred knew some bounds.

July 14th

So as far as I knew as of July 14th 2008 I was about to serve her with a defamation suit that would not just pave the way to clearing my name, but  make her face the consequences of what I knew to be her fraud, malice and perjury.

I had even paid a laywer 5K to help me with the complaint. His name is Richard Fine and what became of him is too strange to easily believe. But in my case, he ran off with the money and later on due to incredibly bizzarre circumstance we were able to get it back...

On August 11th the suit was filed and on August 13th 2008 the civil suit for defamation, infliction of emotional distress was filed.

There would be no logic to me breaking a restraining order period. But considering that I was working on the civil suit which I paid 5 K to a laywer for and had filed a notice of appeal

 You'd have to flash forward a month and five or more days to know what new scene Notaro had created to retaliate for the civil suit and the notice of appeal. Or more exactly, what her Law firm Lavely and Singer and her friendship with Nick Kroll could invent to win at all costs.

On Septmeber 25th 2008, at the arraignment, A public defender, Anan Desai would make me aware of this but not give me a copy.

I did not "redact" the first page. And the second page was also full of "redactions" but eventually a clean copy was handed over. There is no legal basis for such redactins but Lavely and Singer and Gregozek new that presenting such redacted documents gave the impression of threat and menace to witnesses etc.

Interestingly this document would show up in the midst of the criminal prosecution to come

Vs the original
Remember this? 

What changed? Well, the redactions remained but now they slip in James Hoffman's name.  You wonder why Detective Martha Defoe doesn't show up at all. Though she'll show up later in a few spectacular ways
Also the inked in part with certified docket?

We'll get to that very soon.

Let's stop here, and try to summarize how the criminal charge is explained by Gregozek et al.

So on August 1st 2008 one again John Gregozek is contacted by "Tig" Notaro.

According to any record, as of May 27th 2008(When Gregozek filed the proof of service with the court) the Threat Management unit did not show up to the restraining order and according to all papers handed over , they did not take on her case AKA vendetta.

Now Notaro is served with a civil suit that will, if allowed to proceed, hold her accountable for the mounting damages towards the target of her vendetta. 

But wait according to this .... Notaro ddin't contact Gregozek after she recieved the civil suit. 

Let's blow some of this up

As you can see - date and time of occurrence 7/14/08

Date and time reported to PD - 8/01/2008

so who reported it to the PD SEVENTEEN DAYS later?

In this "updated reported" that we know is updated due to Hoffman and the "court docket thing"

Susp contacted Vict through Win in violation of court order. 

Check out the person reporting box... no one. That would become a big thing or should have become a big thing 

instead of a reporter of the alleged crime with have an involved person named Martha Kelly and for no legal reason, her other info is redacted.

So we have to beleive someone contacted PD 17 days after a crime and no one saw fit to write who reporting said crime? One report is only signed by Gregozek the next it's Gregozek and Hoffman.

Now looking at this ...

 it would take a lot to see what it wrong. And it would only strike me as wrong, years later, when I considered this document

And that is confirmed

So a police report is altered or plain updated for the same date - August 1st 2008 and as that above document shows Gregozek and Now Hoffman submitted the certified Restraining order and proof of service to the court to start the prosecution.

Well, first I was never served with the order. This maybe was a technicality or it was legal. I've never figured that one out still and none of the defense lawyers that would be involved would try to make anything of it.

And throughout the 19 months that would follow, this would be the only report made as to this first charge.

So many things. Beyond so many. I see that you are making time to read my blog. I imagine only to make sure you don’t get bad mouthed or sued or something. I don’t want to do that but I do want you to just see this and tell me if 11-1 was acceptable. I want you to go to the DA and help me file charges and I want you and your office to report the ex parte to the right entities. I have a clear case, now, of just complete neglect on the part of the PD. Hoagie seemed downright malicious but your office was the least evil party and of course there is always the overworked excuse and the you are not paid by the defendant thing.

Firstly this TMU unit is not ever the first one called and there should be a 911 call of her calling the police the first time. No one ever made any attempt to find out why this unit would pick up the phone for Tig Notaro when they protect JUDGES, CITY WORKERS, and only handle cases of AGGRAVATED STALKING. They wouldn’t interview one witness when all her allegation take place in crowded placess.
Where is the 911 call of the scared Notaro. Where is the report from the initial police after a 911 call? Where is the 911 call of Notaro calling on August 1st or even a report on what was said on August 1st or a phone log of the TMU and a phone record of Notaro calling. I would bet anything none exists until AFTER notaro was sued. This was all admissible post 5/28/08 stuff.

Phone log from 7/14/09- Billoon in Vienna, Austria- now suddenly her phone used to contact Notaro. Why not Kashians or Klingers or Marthas? Did Martha drop her phone and break it? What are the chances of the phone owner moving to Vienna before trial? And, I can send you the emails where I ask for Michelle Billoon as a witness for my side. But, then I found out she moved to Vienna. Could I tell you all this? No because soon into trial you cut me off and said I was “harrassing’ you when I tried to tell you things. Why don’t you go to the DA or you or someone else report the fact that Mathilde Notaro was pressuring Hunter Seidman to witness tamper and he did so. Why don’t you or any PD try to report that and the many Ex partes that can be inferred from the documents I have and just common sense. Are you aware there was on off calendar meeting between Boags and Kerlin on October 22nd 2009 and that a pretrial was set in the criminal courts for December 14,2009 ,that was vacated when they just dropped the competency thing without explanation? How is that possible .
Are you aware that the DA got involved but then at the end said on the record, “ I don’t really know anything about this case so judge give any bail you want” Slightly paraphrased but what happened. Are you aware that Everman never alerted me to dates where I supposedly didn’t show and claimed to have no idea of your memo. Are you aware that I had no reason to be denied OR and that you should have alerted the judge to that every day and OR should have been reinstated? Are you aware that on February 22nd 2009 is the first time KATIE FORD interviews Martha Kelly. Is Boags off the case here? Or does the discovery of Montalvo get him to escape or get kicked off. Then, when they find out about Julius and Heidi they really know( They were told in many e-mails and transcripts anyhow by ME) Why no Badar now that the Montalvo is dead 4 days after coming in to talk to you? Are you aware that no police were ever called on April 12th 2008 and Boags send an urgent request for my “arrest report” any communications 911 etc for the 29th and he recicived the response on Septmember 14th 2009 that no police were called to largo on April 12th 2008 and that no arrest report existed for the “crime” of April 29th 2008 because no crime was committed and no report was made by Montalvo or Badar? Are you aware that this all goes on when I’m supposedly incompetent and when according to the file boags is asking for it when tasha penny and Ramirez are on the case(according to documents from the file_

Are you aware that in the search warrant for November 4th 2009 it is alleged that as a stalker I would naturally keep evidence of my crimes and they were sure they would find me out and that they were there especially for crimes that Notaro was alleged to have happened on August 22nd 2009 now. Are you aware that never onece is the fact that stalking charges were rejected on August 22nd 2008 mentioned by anyone. Are you aware that they have from the start consistently omitted any mentioln of how or when they were contacted on August 1st about the alleged 7/14/08 incident?
Are you aware that they took communications with my lawyer howard Williams and that it is listed on the property receipt? Are you aware that they tried to remand me on July 9th 2009 because someone named Lauren D contacted Notaro and that they must have found out it was not us in any way(according to how they investigated to death any hunch of Notaro’s thus far. Are you aware that a hearing to remand was set for August 4th 2009 and just never mentioned again because they found that it wasn’t me but this was never brought out by anyone.

Are you aware that these same failed hunches “justify” their search that led to my arrest on this illegal warrant on November 4th 2009 . Are you aware that Moreno only wrote out his report on February 26th 2010 and it was printed out for discovery or to be given to the CA on March 16th 2010.

Are you aware of how many times Gregozek lies and how impeachable he was? Are you aware that Hoffman and Defoe and Dunn are nowhere to be found come trial and no one but gregozek will “testify’ to his reports. Are you aware that Defoe cried when she was in my house . Are you aware that the property report in jail says no charges, no bail, and contact no one under the contact sections and that my occupation is a…. LABORER.

Are you aware that when my sister called the jail theytold her I was there for Domestic Violence. On my way out of jail I saw my hideious mug shot and DOMESTIC VIOLENCE on the paper. I blocked it out for awhile but now I know I saw it. Why? Because they were now using the illegally obtained bullshit Dv protective order to really get me and that Judge Villar says in the transcript of July 8th 2009 “ her charges are serious and significant.” Did you know that Stratton said the same as an excuse to keep me without bail. Are yo aware that Waxler when desperate to remand me on July 9th when something doesn’t go her way in court tells villar that I am under a criminal protective order and show her it without argument from the private attorney that is there instead of Howard Williasm.

Are you aware that no one argued and Silvershit would not let me say anything. He’s being sued btw as is Howard Williams.

Are you aware that Gregozek says that Notaro send him email he was sure I sent on July 8th but that the evidence show that in fact messages were sent on July 5th to Allison Seivers and Jennifer Waxler that says,

These message are obviously from Alisa, “Anything we can do with this.”

The doc show that it was then forwarded to Gregozek 3 days later. Are you aware they are saying that she just got the messages and therefore Waxler didn’t even have time to see it- this is in the court transcript.

Are you aware than on Sept 8th 2009 with Kerlin she says, “ Criminal proceedings have been reinstated pursuant to the report from department 52(Jessner at the time btw) and Boags says “ from my understanding of the status of this case- can we approach) then it’s lost to the record but there he does nothing but request a vacation. I wonder if he did have a vacation because it says that tasha penny and Ramirez were assigned that day and this was a last minute thing.

Are you aware that on the charging document for the four counts added and then dropped in March it says VA(arraignment?) August 12th 2009(the day of the competency ploy and the secret hearing with Martinez) and that it is the filed on January 21st by boags who know knows that Notaro and her witnesses are liars. There is no evidence of a motion to amend but Silvershit and Villar don’t care and no one ever will. Are you aware that Boags was in court on august 12 2009 for no known reason. Could it be that by filing the new motions I’d upset his plan and now statutes of limitations had become a problem and the competency ploy was born.

Are you aware that Katie ford says in the brief that the police were called on April 12th 2008 when document exist since September 14th 2009 that say this is a lie. And, our you aware that Ford says that charges were filed on August 18th 2008 and that on January 10 is when the four charges were added. Yet, according to the minutes they were added without motion on January 21st 2010? Are you aware that according to the police reports of Gregozek(some unsigned by anyone by the way) on January 27 2009 aftter presenting his evidence of NOTHING Kelly Boyer files four charges against me. No one tells me this and I had a PD at the time. Only when I go pro per do I not this. On March 23rd 2009 I mention that I can’t do a farretta when I see that four charges were filed without my knowledge. No PD ever says they heard about it. So, then they scurry and get a document that was filed on March 12th 2009 to come in and they add TWO CHARGES. It will say in any subsequent report by the police and there are many- 4 charges filed by Kelly Boyer. It never will say submitted and it will never correct that 2 were filed on March 23rd 2009.

Then, a document exists where they ask for the rap sheet of Jackie Kashian on March 11 2009 and on this document it says that I am facing 3 charges, not one. It is saying that without any notice and pre Bork hearing they have managed to say these charges exist. There is evidence that Kashian has some record but it’s redacted and I can’t really tell. No one has made any effort to find out and I can’t do everything. I did pay attorney 14k to help and I did count on the PD and I am indigent but nothing was done to halt this in any way. Why would Boags ask for communications from the Police as a rush job on Sept 10 2009 when the threat management is doing the investigation. Wouldn’t they have this info. And, if they don’t what possible excuse can there be?

Waxler repeatedly uses her name and how she is working with them and yet they never seem to supply a witness or a report or any confirmation of Notaro’s allegations. This doesn’t stop them from using it in every search warrant till November 4th 2009.

Police report dated 8/1/08- stating that on August 1st this was reported- 18 DAYS after Notaro was allegedly told this by Martha Kelly

Police Report dated August 12th 2008- Gregozek only ready to testify to truth of it.
(No one listed as “reporting” But here it says that it was reported on August 1st 2008-)

“On July 14, 2008 ,Spitzberg told Martha Kelly to “Tell Tig to drop the restraining order or I’m never gonna let this go. Kelly is a friend and relayed Spitzbergs message.”

Search Warrants. Same or less than report. No mention of “firearms” Kelly identified S by one photograph on August 8th 2008.

Gregozek gets to more than strongly hint that I’m a stalke on the stand, but if so his unit would have a big file on all this. None of this is mentioned and his characterizations are left in their minds as our the search warrants and orders that make me out to look as if something much bigger is underlying all of this. The fact that on August 22 2008 the stalking charge “Notaro insists they file” is rejected by city attorney Webster. There is never mention in any narrative of this being dropped and no one sees fit to bring this up when Gregozek or Notaro is on the stand.

So was Malzman saying that I didn’t break the rule with Klinger and Kashian in the closing. Is that what the foreman was referring to after it was over when he said you ruined it in your closing. What did Klinger and Kashian say in court? They didn’t tell Tig? What about the other versions.
. Billoon phone now suddenly used when now Martha suddenly invents getting a call and having to use a phone of someone who has moved to Vienna- Michelle Billoon.
In the court trial Klinger and Kashian are coached to say that I approached them to pass on messages too. You’d think they’d try to get me on those too rather than the self destructive illegal protective order thing that repulsed the judge and made him see that they were up to no good.
Martha now says she didn’t use her own phone now. Why? Fearful of obtained phone records? Truth: They are all perjuring themselves and no one cared to catch them. Why is the 18 day delay not a cause of concern for my defense and yet it does concern the prosecutors because they keep changing that and the police begin to leave it out of all reports but one at the beginning.

Search warrant January 21st 2009 – absolutely no probable cause. No one even mentions the traverse filed or the contant change in the narrative or the emails they reciceved that alerted them to so much early on.

What it says” On July 14, 2008Spitzberg told Martha Kelly(a friend of Notaro)” Tell Tig to drop the restraining order or I’m never going to let it go. As a result, The los angeles city attorney’s office filed one count273.6(a) PC Violation of Restraining Order against Spitzberg(Case No. 8CA10541) The case is currently pending trial.

Why do they not include any detail of the date reported and why do they not include the firearm thing. Why keep it this short?

Because why would someone wait 18 days to report it if as Kelly said to Ford Martha Kelly really feared that I would “go after Notaro physically.” They know that they are lying about when it was reported and they think it will be brought up some day. It isn’t.

Follow up investigation dated August 12th 2008- reported by Notaro on 8/1/08 but person reporting is left blank.

On July 14th Spitzberg told Kelly, “ tell tig to drop the restraining order or I’m never going to let this go in violation of court order.

Continuation Sheet -TMU

Source of activity. Detective Gregozek was assigned to Detective support and Vice Division, Threat Management Unit. Gregozek received a telephone call from victim Mathilde Notaro who reported that suspect Alisa Spitzberg had contacted her friend, witness Martha Kelly, and told her, “ Tell Tig (Mathilde) to drop the restraining order or I’m never going to let this go” Spitzberg is under a valid restraining oreder prohibiting contact with Notaro.

( NO DATE LISTED as to when report taken and when these two detectives went to interview this martha)

Investigation: Detective Defoe and Gregozek responded to the residence of Kelley and interviewed her. Kelley stated that on July 14th 2008 she at El cid night club talking with her friend Jackie Kashian. Spitzberg approached Kelly and introduced herself as “Alisa” Spitzberg stated her rights were taken away and that “she can’t buy a gun” Kelly asked Spitzberg if she wanted to buy a gun and spitzberg denied wanting to do so. Spitzberg told Kelley “tell tig to drop this restraining order or I’m never going to let this go. Spitzberg then stated, “ I mean legally. I’m not physically threatening her.” Kelly walked away from Spitzberg. approximately ten minutes later, Kelly was sitting at a table with her friend , Jeff Klinger, when Spitzberg walked up to her. Spitzberg stated, “ One more time. Tell Tig to drop the restraining order. Kelley then called Notaro and told her what Spitzberg said.

When??? Why are no dates suddenly included? No mention over and over in any of these reports why this would only be reported 18 days later. No mention of this to the Jury by city employed PD. On another police report It just says “On August 8th 2008 Kelly identified Spitzberg by single photograph.”

“Gregozek can testify” but no Defoe and then the report is changed to include Hoffman who isn’t supposedly there at all. REPORTED according to PR on August 1st at 1-30 PM but who reported it not listed. No evidence of the interviews by phone or in person. A year later Hoffman is added but according to the “investigation” Defoe and Gregogok went all the way to Marthas(Redondo beach) to show show a photo of me and leave. No “six pack” or anything just one photo.

On November 5th 2008 Tig Notaro write this e-mail to City attorney ,Mr. Ramirez after her lawyer’s email in which she gets her out of a subpoena:

The following is my recount of my being harassed by Alisa Spitzberg via third part

My friend and fellow comedian, Martha Kelly, informed me of being singled out and harassed by Alisa Spitzberg regarding the permanent I was awarded against Ms. Spitzberg on May 28th 20008. Martha described being at the venue El Cid in Los Feliz Ca to do stand up comedy and Ms. Spitzberg approaching her and saying such things as “ Tell Tig to drop the restraining order, she’s a pathological liar, my mother can’t sleep at night because of all this. I can’t buy a firearm now. I don’t see her as a human being and I will never let her rest as long as she’s alive. Comedian, Jeff Singer, also witnessed this interaction and contacted me about the scene Ms. Spitzberg was causing at the show. Mr. Singer said that Ms. Spitzberg’s behavior and comments were extremely distubrging and offered himself as a witness if needed.

Thank you in advance for your attention in this matter.

Mathilde(Tig) Notaro

Now, she is singled out and harassed. None of this should be brought up by enforced PD? Again, those writing up all reports and search warrants want to keep this out because it BEGS the question(that no one would beg on my behalf) as to why they’d wait 18 days to call the police and then it also would help if any effort was made to get Tobin Shea who would have heard about such a “disturbing scene” Where is Kashian here. Is she at a table or inside or not there at all???????????????? Why did no one see fit to try to do anything on that.
Marth Kelly to investigator for Public Defender on January 15, 2009.

I asked if she knew a female subject by the name of Alisa Spitzberg. she said yes. I then asked if Spitzberg had spoken to while she happened to be at the El Cid Theatre. She stated yes. I next asked to explain in detail what had occurred on that date in question, when the two of them had crossed paths with at the el Cid Theatre.
On an unknown date in question Kelly said that Spitzberg had walked up to her while she herself happened to be at the el cid Dinner theatre and had repeatedly stated to her something to the effect of “Tell Tig to drop this restraining order.” When Kelly was question to be more specific about this particular incident she advised that she had already given a statement to the police and if I wanted more specific details about this incident, then to read the police report. When asked when this event had actually occurred Kelly once again said to refer to the police report for more details.

All of a sudden Kelly became very uncooperative with me and as I tried to ask her some more questions about this incident, she hung up on me. I then ended my conversation with her, and conducted no further investigation.

Note: Why no mention of Klinger and Kashian- too sadsack unsuccessful comedians who then were rewarded with the “Bentzen Ball” right before trial was set to start. What is she confirming in the police report. Why would Malzman tell that to a jury . Why is the firearm immflammatory bullshit not mentioned. What was said that made her hang up – anything to do with the 18 time lapse between reporting to Gregozek.

Martha Kelly To Jennifer Waxler, City attorney on February 23rd 2009- first time talks to city attorney when according to Katie Ford charges were filed on August 18th- though that too is very open to debate according to documents and minutes et and statements by police and other prosecutors”
. This Hardcore detective unit who “invesgitated” never saw fit to talk to anyone but Mathilde, Willen, and Notaor and there has never been any notes or signed statements – only what I include here) at all before bringing charge after charge over the course of two years.

Summary only
Interview conducted over the phone- witness confirms police report although adds that the original conversation was longer than stated in police report.

Jeff Klinger to city attorney Jennifer Waxler on February 22nd 2009

“Summary only” and unsigned. “Interview conducted over the phone.

Witness stated on 7-14-08 he was at “El Cid” night club sitting at a table with Martha Kelly when Spitzberg approached and told Martha Kelly to tell tig to drop the restraining order. Klinger further stated that Tig was a liar and was going to prove her wrong. Witness stated that Spitzberg was “worked up when she made these comments.

Where is kashian here???

Jackie Kashians statement to Jennifer Waxler, City attorney on February 24th 2009

Summary only- interview conducted over the phone . Witness confirmed the police report although stated that the conversation was much longer and more convoluted.”

Never brought up at trial that Kashian was only mentioned when a plea kept getting rejected. Where was Kashian. According to Martha she is both at the table outside in the paation and in the club standing. In trial testimony she is only inside- never outside. The court testimony will sink all of them eventually but at trial despite me going nuts in my chair the PD would refused to impeach them

What is she confirming about the police report. The police report says that I only spoke to Martha and said, “ Tell Tig to drop the restraining order or I’ll never let it go.” Is she confirming that she wasn’t there.

Investigation: Detective Defoe and Gregozek responded to the residence of Kelley and interviewed her. Kelley stated that on July 14th 2008 she at El cid night club talking with her friend Jackie Kashian. Spitzberg approached Kelly and introduced herself as “Alisa” Spitzberg stated her rights were taken away and that “she can’t buy a gun” Kelly asked Spitzberg if she wanted to buy a gun and spitzberg denied wanting to do so. Spitzberg told Kelley “tell tig to drop this restraining order or I’m never going to let this go. Spitzberg then stated, “ I mean legally. I’m not physically threatening her.” Kelly walked away from Spitzberg. approximately ten minutes later, Kelly was sitting at a table with her friend , Jeff Klinger, when Spitzberg walked up to her. Spitzberg stated, “ One more time. Tell Tig to drop the restraining order. Kelley then called Notaro and told her what Spitzberg said.

Police Report dated August 12th 2008- Gregozek only ready to testify to truth of it.
(No one listed as “reporting” But here it says that it was reported on August 1st 2008-)

“On July 14, 2008 ,Spitzberg told Martha Kelly to “Tell Tig to drop the restraining order or I’m never gonna let this go. Kelly is a friend and relayed Spitzbergs message.”

So is Kashian confiming she wasn’t there? What happens with all the phone calls on different phones at trial and Kashian being inside and me talking to her and telling her to tell Tig things?

Interesting to note that on 3/11/09 there is a rap compliance of Kashian that says that I am now facing 3 charges( though those charges according to the minutes were only added on March 23rd 2009) and everything is redacted and no one ever told me if Kashian had a record or if she did what it was. The jury certainly wasn’t told.

Martha Kelly To Katie Ford, City Attorney on February 22, 2010

Unsigned again. Summary Only

Witness confirmed police report and stated Spitzberg actually spoke with her for quiet(sic) a while that evening. “Ranting about Tig.” Calling tig “It.” D clearly told Martha Kelly to “ Tell Tig to drop the R.O and that she will never let this go. D mentioned how this R.O made it so she can’t buy a gun now also.
Kelly had never met Spitzberg before and was unsure how Spitzberg knew her at all. D said something about Witness having worked with defendan’ts sister in the past, but Wit did not recall D’s sister. Witness did not know how D knew that Witness knew tig either. Wit stated that she has known Tig for 11 years and there are postings online with of Wit and Tig and she believes that how D knew Witness knew Tig.
Wit stated that D was not physically aggressive towards her but very “amped” up and “talking in circles” Wit began to grow fearful of D and left the conversation. About 20 Minutes lated D again came to Wit’s table where Jackie and Jeff were and again advised that Tig had better droop the R.O

Wit stated she was fearful for Tig’s safety and was fearful that D would go after Tig Physically.

Note: Then why did it take Tig 18 days to call the police about this. By all evidence it took longer than 18 days and these reports are backdated or the TMU wouldn’t pursue this until Allison Sievers called them and said that Notaro was sued on August 15th 2008 and they better do something. Now Jackie is at a table??? Called Tig It really because who the hell wants to call an ugly middle aged woman, “Tig.” Now Kashian and Klinger are not only there but witnesses to THE ALLEGED CRIME

Trial Breif written up by Kathleen Ford City Attorney on March 4th 2010

On July 14th, 2008 Defendant approached victims friend Martha Kelly at “El Cid” Nightclub. Defendant approached Witness Kelly twice to tell her to drop the restraining order or she will never let this go. Witnesss Jackie Kashian and Jeff Klinger were also present and heard defendant say “she was going to her (Victim) Back and to tell her to drop the restraining order. None of these three witnesses knows Defendant other than this incident either.

Ford now is very cautious about what she writes. As she is assuming these “witnesses” will get cross examined on prior inconsistent statements. Now, Kashian and Klinger witnessed THE SUPPOSED CRIME.This is taken as fact by PD and this the jury sees none of this. What ever happened to this “get her victim back” now.

Manager of El Cid to Investigator for Public Defender .

On 1/21/09 I drove to el cid dinner theatre at 4212 W. Sunset blvd in los angeles. Upon my arrival I spoke with the manager of this facility. I then identified myself to Tobin Shea and he agreed to speak to me about this case in now under investigation. I briefly explained this case under investigation and asked him he knew any of the participants involved After providing him the name of several of the involved subjects, Tobin Shea said he has never heard of any of these individuals.
Tobin shea stated that comedians do perform at his dinner theatre on Monday nights and he does work at this facility most every night it is open, but further advised he is not familiar with this situation, which is now under investigation. Since he is the manager, Tobin Shea, said he would be familiar with any type of situation of significance, that may have occurred here in this particular case. Tobin Shea advised he had no idea what I was talking about. I then ended my conversation with him and conducted no further investigation.

And based on that, this would all begin in a different court - the criminal courts.

Sometime after August 19th 2008, I'd get this in the mail

Note that the these minutes were the last one's I picked up from the court.
Anyone looking would think an arrest took place that relates to the initial filing of the charge. We'll get back to that later because it requires a lot of context and then it would require legal knowledge that I don't even have.

Let's skip the top part -  but please note that the arrest and bail listed are t dated a year and four months after the charge. I'll just say that there was no arrest or bail set(other than own recognizance) related to this charge or any charges to come. That sounds confusing and it is, but will become clear much later on.

 Case filed:
 August 25th 2008- one count- 273.6(A) - Violation of a restraining order. And this document evidences that such a filing took place on that date 

Well, this is the document that arrived in the mail to tell me that such a file was charged.... UH.... after the letter was sent.

As you can see a charge is filed but a letter sent predates the filing - Not sure if that makes sense to someone familiar with procedure - i.e is it normal to sent a letter before you file?

And in light of the mention of bail and arrest, let's just look to see if any arrest took place subsequent to filing of the single charge: As the minute show the arrest and bail reference a date

These are the only documents handed over, over the course of this 23 month prosecution related to that-

Note how it says that this was filed on August 25th 2008 and "executed" on August 12th 2009

Yet on the next page of the same document it says that it was executed on August 19th 2008

So after the fact of the filing of the charge we would guess that John Gregozek has applied for an arrest warrant though this was a misdemeanor which he did not witness and where no stalking charge was granted him and we see that no attachment or any detail is given to support the granting of such an arrest warrant. We know no such warrant was allowed him because there was no arrest made.

And on August 4 2009 NOT 2008 Gregozek drafts this... It is only turned over after the trial was over and discovery was requested for the civil case that followed the criminal trial.

Please take a LOT OF note of the date and wonder why a year later he'd draft something like this

then page 1 of the minutes involves an arraignment, and another order of some sort being granted the "Victim," in this case..

Here's a crop from the first page of the minutes-

Ok, the date change from October 1st 2008 is due to me realizing that the arraignment was scheduled on the first day of Rosh Hashannah, so we found out you can go in and advance the date so that's what we did and so the October 1st date was vacated.

notable things that happened. Desai asked me " is this a joke." And then he told me and then he made his business to tell my mother, "I'd be happy to take this case to trial."

But then something happened that I didn't know happened till many months in ...Without Hearing or notice and based on no demand heard on any record, Judge Dennis Landin would grant a Domestic Violence Criminal Protective order without the benefit of due process - a hearing of any kind- and despite the fact that it has never been in dispute that notaro and I did not know each other much less have a domestic partnership of any kind.

The public defender assigned that day, Anan Desai, did not see it has part of his job, we can assume, to fight such a clear violation of what was right and lawful. Such an order would meet with a spectacular future during trial, a year and a half after Landin signed off to it.

As you can see, from the minutes and these documents no hearing or even forewarning(notice) of any kind was made

Note the notes on the bottom of the green paper - FV= Family Violence DV- Domestic Violence

So " FV DV etc"

It has never been in dispute that me and Notaro were strangers. Not even aquainted much less family or domestic relations. This order granted to the prosecution(or more exactly- Lavely and Singer and Gregozek) was not legal in any way. No due process occurred before it's granting. The public defender did nothing to protect my due process at the time, and much much later- In March of 2010, this lawless and baseless order would return in a spectacular way. We'll get to that when that minute order comes but Katie Ford, Alissa Malzman Sterling and Judge Ronald Moore know what I'm talking about.

Page 2

On that day, October 16th 2008, I was approached by a public defender named Nicky Meehan. Though she said she was not my appointed lawyer, she proceeded to tell me that I got really lucky and have been offered the best possible plea in the criminal justice system. "Informal Diversion" is what she told me it was called. The offer was "12- 24"Plea offer made by Nicky Meehan. Informal Diversion  a few hours of anger management and in a year it will be off my record. Well, since I was only angry that Id been falsely accused 

The city attorney does something of note here, they order the restraining order from the Santa Monica court after I refuse the plea- on November 6th 2008. In other words, they added a criminal charge to me without even having the order in their possession ,

Note: There was never any proof of service. The restraining order was not served on me. On top of the order being a void order due to fraud and perjury, no service occurred here and yet the prosecution proceeded.

So next date is November 6th 2008. 

Franica greets me in court and asks me, " Do you see Notaro in court?" I say "no" and ask why, She tells me "the subpoenad notaro to court today" 

What doesn't seem to be present there is evidence of this occurring or any indicaition as told to me by Franica Tawn that behind he scenes the purported victim in this prosecution was communicaing to the city attorney's involved (Carlos Ramirez, in this instance) trhough the private lawfirm she'd retained for cease and desist letter and to very curiously handle her desire to get a restraining order and then to defend against a defamation suit served on Notaro very soon before such a criminal charge would be submitted by Detective John Gregozek and then approved by a Phyllis Henderson

This is all I was given evidencing those communications between a Deputy CA Carlos Ramirez and Allison Hart Sievers of the Lavely and Singer law firm. the date in Sharpe-12/11/08 might be the date that my public defender received this info or not, because I never was told that Notaro was let out of a subpoena due to this "communication"

Then the second page is the only statement of any kind requested by the prosecutors as to this charge and as you can see it is not under oath etc. They would let her out of this subpoena on Lavely and Singer's lawyers requests. And, my public defender did nothing to remedy that.

Insert the CA ordering the restraining order from Santa Monica court. It was not even in their possession when agreeing to File Gregozeks and Sievers demand they charge.

Also of note: at this stage this discover was handed over which will become significant when another city attorney, Jennifer Waxler, is put on the case and does not hand over communications from Lavely and Singer

What else went on .. talked to Franica. Sent her evidence etc.

Next date December 11 2008

Not too eventful date expect for the fact that on that day after a lot of urging on my part, Franica Tawn, agreed she'd get me an investigator for the public defenders office and she told me to get her the names and any detail I knew of potential witnesses. 

Now if you note the minutes. The minutes would echo what I was told.... nothing. I was told nothing by Franica Tawn about such a motion, at no time. I only became aware of it after trial in March of 2010.... more than a year later.

Let's look at the minute orders. why is their no evidence of this filing and when it was set for hearing. no mention of any motion. 

and then the next page starts with January 29th 08

Why is there no mention of this motion and why did Franica Tawn urge me to take plea offers despite her knowning very well that I could not be convicted if any law was followed.

Why did she tolerate the fact that her motion was not entered into the minutes and did she get pressured into dropping the motion. If then wouldn't it still be in the docket and mention of cancelled hearing etc. 

As far as I knew the only thing that was being done was that an Investigator had gone to talk to all sorts of friendly and unfriendly witnesses . Franica would no fill me in how that was going but I knew of two that I'd already gotten affidavits from 

So here's the next scheduled pretrial"

 But to be able to move forward to the rest we have to go back to what happened in between the December date and this date....and all without me being told a thing..

The first month of 2009 was a very busy month for John Gregozek - when it came to his role in this case...

and it was a busy month for Neil Spector ( the investigator for the public defender)

And, no one would tell me what either was up to for a long time to come

Here is the documentary evidence of what John Gregozek was up to in chronological order

2 or more years later we'd learn this since none of this was turned over to us in the criminal case but for whatever reason was turned over in the civil righs case that we'd file in 2011

Here's his January 2009, in his own words as of February 3rd 2009

So this is Gregozek chronology of January -

January 13-  Gregozek was notified by Allison Seavers that Notaro receieved 4 postins on her Facebook online Profile by Facebook Profile ID "Ingrid Good." the Posting occured on January 7,2009. Due to the content of the messages, Notaro believed that the postings were created by Spitzberg

Then, we have these emails that were only handed over 2 years after the trial was over that indeed both John Gregozek  and city attorney we haven't seen listed on the minutes - Kelly Boyer- received emails from Lavely and Singer lawyer, Allison Sievers or Allison Hart Sievers-. Again please note that none of this was made available to the defense during the criminal trial. Only in discovery for the civil case did these bits of evidence emerge.

Ok, so we see that indeed Gregozek and Kelly Boyer were contacted by one of Marty Singer's lawyers and urged to begin taking steps to execute search warrants and then to add charges in relation to we must presume-- the evidence such search warrants would return....

Did John Gregozek obey such commands/requests/call them what you want?

Well, Gregozek says he did-

And who granted him that warrant and what he found are complicated since these judges were 1) lied to by Gregozek in his affidavit and in his "statement of facts"  Also these same judges would show up later to act very suspiciously.

In a separate document you can see that John Gregozek has repeately perjured himself in order to please his masters at Lavely and Singer.

But for now, here we see that search warrant he mentions here

Insert Jessner warratn

Then he say this for January 23rd 2009 

 here are the accompanying documents

Gregozek isn't done there is still January 26th 2009 - and this is how he puts that into ink-

And these are the documents made available to the court and prosecutor and then much later to the defense- re; his finding as to January 26th 2009

Now we have no choice but to guess that though this all looks confusing and not indicative of any evidence of guilt much less a smoking gun.... we are forced to assume that John Gregozek has, as of January 26th, found the goods on this Alisa Spitzberg person. No longer can she just refuse plea bargains for one charge. Now she will face five charges. What a dumbass. rejected the lowest plea bargain possible - informal diversion- and now busted on four more charges.

Gregozek we can imagine can contact Notaro and or her civil lawyer- Allison Sievers and tell them that Notaro was dead right.... Gregozek now has solid evidence to bring to any trial .

Even if it's not solid enough for a trial this document makes implicit that Noaro was right in her hunch. Then Gregozek made those hunches into viable and convincing evidene of guilt.

HOw do we know all that-

Well, Gregozek is merely a cop doing a public servant's job, right.

And, as of January 27th 2009, he is not alone in his professional opinion. Though most of us, including me, cannot discern from what he wrote in this February 3 2009 report.... Kelly Boyer can and

And here we have it reconfirmed on that day and then in many subsequent reports - Kelly Boyer added four charges on January 27th 2009.

So where are we? We are two days away from a pretrial hearing and since all of this was done exigent circumstance-- I have been toiling under the impression that I will come into court on January 29th 2008 to be be faced by the reports being prepared by the investigator for the public defender as me and Franica Tawn fight this one charge.

But as the documents ... document-

Notaro, Gregozek and now City Attorney Kelly Boyer have a surprise in store for me.

Wait till she sees and now she'll be ruing the day she turned down that offer for "informal diversion " made to her on October 16th 2008. Now five charges...

January 29th 2009. 

Unaware of the exigent circumstance search warrants and clueless about any addition of four more charges I go to court. Here you should expect quite a hearing. A turning point in the prosecution as the stakes become so much higher for this prosecution. we even know that after the fact --- such charges were added - on February 3 Gregozek had faxed such a report

My bail likely would have not only no longer been "own recognizance" but would have increased so substantially that we wouldn't even have the money to get me out before trial....

Five counts of violating a restraining order and then me and my counsel finding out about secret search warrants . warrants covered under darkness that produced evidence of not just one criminal charge but four.


I went to that pretrial hearing just lke I went to every one before and absolutely nothing of any consequence occurred.

And as you can see from this minute order, I didn't block out the events... nothing of any obvious consequence occurred-

I ran out of money to get more transcripts but I wish I could show those two but here in black and white -

So as I remembered - nothing of note. just come back next month

But a few other interesting things happened between December 11 2008 and January 29th 2009

1) A Neil Spector(an investigator for the private defender had begun speaking to just a few of the witnesses who I suspected would assist in my defense. my defense being that none of this had happened. And that the restraining order was a "void judgement" since it was entirely based on fraud and perjury. As of January 29th 2009, there was ample evidence and statements I'd acquire and then Neil Spector would acquire that showed this all to be a fraud/ set up.

2) This is a strange one because for whatever reason, the public defender on the case during this time period- Franica Tawn- chose not to inform me that on January 28th 2009 she'd gone into court and filed a -motion for discovery(long overdue in this case since it was now 4 months in on a one count misdemeanor) She never told me she did any such thing and when I looked at the minutes they confirmed that Franica Tawn like those who preceded her would just not file the most basic and expect motions to fight what they should have long known was a malicious prosecution. It was only after this case would end in a 12 day trial that I'd see this in the court file

In other words, for the first time the public defenders office was asking this prosecution to pony up and since some of the witnesses I'd given franica tawn were supposed to be prosecution witness who I knew couldn't keep such false stories straight... the prosecution was well aware that an investigator was on the case and talking to witnesses they would assume were favorable to their case - Martha Kelly, Stef Willen, Kevin Seccia, Michael Grifee, Mark Flanagan. And, most importantly - Notaro's agent - Heidi Feigin.

So in other other words, they were being challenged and Lavely and Singer was being challenged since it was being revealed that this case could not survive any "collateral attack on the validity of the restraining order.. Not only did they not have a case but it would be exposed that from the start, there was no case and John Gregzek and then the city attorney were caving to the demands of certain entities. In this case, Nick Kroll, and Marty Singer.

We'll get back to how from start to finish the court and clerk was fixing the minutes. at no time would they enter one defense filing into the minutes and there were many motions filed over the coming year and few months since January 28th 2009 when Tawn's motion was omitted from the official record.

Let's go back to January 29th 2009-  Can there be a good explanation for the omission in the record. Maybe Kelly Boyer didn't show up that day. Maybe absent her presence they chose not to add those four charges

Well, she was there

So for the first time we see Kelly Boyer. It will also be the first time we see Judge Mary Lou Villar but not the last. Judge Mary Lou Villar would be seen many times before this criminal case would be over and it might or might not be important to note that Mary Lou Villar is the the sister of the mayor, Anthony Villargrossa. They do have different names but there is no dispute that the then mayor of L.A is the brother of Judge Villar.

Ok, so how to explain not just the omission of the defense motion from the minutes, but the omission of anything related to the addition of four criminal charges- as seen in John Gregozek's police report

Here is judge Villar's notes of that hearing -

Let's blow that up a bit - 

In the right hand corner it says that I face one count - 273.6 then violation date - july 14th 2008

Bail- OR(same as before)

And though they seem to have spelled the name wrong Bower is Boyer and she is there instead of Tasha Penny.

Now, let's look at this closer at what Judge Villar wrote relative to January 29th 2009 

Not the best handwriting but I can make some of it out.... first line - Boyers
Second line: Wants to proceed pro per

It's true at this point Franica would say strange things to me and she chose to keep me in the dark about filing that motion on January 28th and so I did feel as if I couldn't stand being kept in the dark in this way.

So January 29th 09 has come and gone and I am not only completely in the dark about motions filed but about three search warrants being granted to Gregozek in a way where I have done something which allows such an extreme search warrant (exigent circumstance) to be granted.

And, though I am there in court on the 29th, and though Gregozek would submit this or transmit this to an unnamed entity we know that the addition of charges did not come to pass as Gregozek would claim

So after being present for what appeared as a highly uneventful pre trial hearing, I go home and basically try to find out how the investigator reports are turning out and again am met with Franica Tawn's apathy in the face of my innocence.

Tawn is not telling me anything regarding Neil Spector and what he might have turned up. Though I had expressed the desire to go pro per(be my own lawyer) I was told to wait till the next hearing to make that move...

So, from January 29th 2009 till the next scheduled hearing (March 12th 2009) I looked forward to the investigator reports and had no idea of any of the machinations that occurred. as far as I knew I faced the same one charge and no efforts had taken place by the cops, private lawyers for Notaro or the prosecution

May he m12th 2009 was a day where even stranger things would become evident and this courts practice of not entering significant entries into the minutes would really get into gear.

Here is the minute entry for that date-

So according to the minutes 

nothing of note occurred on March 12th 2009. As far as I knew and as far as these minutes would tell me, the prosecution had not mutated in any significant way.

I faced one count of violating a restraining order . a crime now alleged to have occured on July 14th 2008.

But again something very wrong was going on with the minutes as evidenced by this "motion" that the minutes wil say was filed and hearing on March 23rd 2009.

What is this about?

Let's make that bigger so you can better decipher If I have lying eyes or NOT-

And on that date - March 12th 2009- a hearing is also set for a motion dated March 10th 2009 and conformed by the clerk

And these documents also showed up, down the road  and I still cannot make sense of them

On March 9th 2009 was an arrest warrant sought. no signature here and no arrest or any notice of charges as of March 12th so...

But these are the minutes of the court printed out a year and a half later. I mention the date of the minutes to make sure this can't be chalked up to a mistake that was soon ( or ever) remedied-

How can this be explained?

First we have Gregozek's report dated february 3 2009 where he asserts that after submitting his findings Kelly Boyer saw evidence that impelled her to add four criminal charges but hey... that didn't  happen. And even though Boyer was present in court to add such four charges of violating a restraning order and she did not, Gregozek would still write a report saying she did.

 Now on March 12th 2009, we have another date where the minutes do not in any way - comport with the motions being filed- a motion to add two charges and a filed farretta motion.

Absent the extremely mysterious omissions and how grossly inaccurate the minutes are and have been before - there are other things that are not indicated by the minute entry for March 12th 2009. As you can see that the way the public defender is noted as present is different from the other orders and there is a reason for that. I was not defended by this Kratu Patel or Franica Tawn or any lawyer. In that hearing I felt that in order to have any fighting chance against this malicious prosecution- I had to represent myself.

As mentioned, so far only pressure to plea on Nicky Meehans part on October 16th 2008 and then the missing Jose Ruvlcable. Then, Franica Tawn and her efforts mixed with her resentment that I should want "my little triall And though she did file a motion that could have cleared me as early as January 28th 2009, she never told me she did so and though the minutes would not reflect any such filing she either knew his or didn' but she made no effort to tell me that hey someone is messing with the minutes or she'd tried her best but... She did tell me "the private lawyer keeps contacting the office." and she followed that with "interesting" but when I asked her to elaborate she clammed up and would tell me know more.

So on March 12th I came in. the prosecutor knew this was my intent and so the discovery due me was to be brought to court.

And so I was given a huge batch of papers by a city attorney and went home to look at them...

And what did I see in these documents. Something that made me feel as if I had to advance the case from April 14th to asap and Kratu Patel made the effort to oblige me as I requested this to him by phone. but that was not all Kratu Patel would say, when I felt so under seige by what I saw and asked him if he unlike Franica would assist me with what clearly was a baseless prosecution that now involved things way way over my head or the heads of most.... Kratu Patel told me this, " There is a conflict of interest with you and the public defenders office and if I was you I would not use us."

This sounded intriguing... Because I had failed to please them by pleaing. I remembered Franica Tawn's words, " you want that little trial of yours" and all along aside of  Anan Desai... and despite the undisputable evidence that something was every wrong with John Gregozek and then the city attorney's actions in this case.... 

Later I'd realize that the statement made by Franica, " Her private lawyer keeps calling the office. Interesting" did not refer to the private attorneys - The infamous Lavely and Singer law firm- being in unusual contact with the prosecution but with the office of the public defender... 

How that discovery was realized will come later. I wrote these notes at the time but I can find the farretta and the transcript that shows againt hat the minutes are not representing what is occurring in ourt.
 3/12/09- The farretta hearing is granted very swiftly and the judge is not
     pleasant. I ask for a mardsen hearing and she impatiently says- only if
     you wait till the end of the day. I can't afford to wait till 4 P.M so I
     go home. For the first time I am given access to discovery. TCIS entry
     from notes by J. Esparza A woman approaches me after the Farretta and want
     to talk to me as " a friend of the court." She tells me she is an
     alternate public defender and I should go to court another time and get
     this mardsen hearing. I take her words to heart and plan to do so ASAP.

So here are the next minute entries.

Then the last entry on page 3 is this

This will show that a farretta was granted on March 12th 2009 but again the judge or her clerk failed to enter this into the court docket

So we have established that as of March 12th 2009 a motion was filed and set for hearing but was not entered into any minutes and no such hearing took place. The fact that such a filing and then cancellation took place is not evident on the the court docket and no one tells me about any of it.

so March 23rd comes and I face the one charge filed on August 25th 2009.   A charge where John Gregozek does writes up a supplemental a year into the prosecution??
Let's blow that up and ask a few questions that we can or can't answer:

According to Gregozek, the original reports were 4/30/08 and 8/1/08. 

So, why would he submit a supplemental dated more than a year later. To who was he submitting such a supplemental. A supplemental that was only handed over to me(or anyone involved in defending me) in 2011 or 2012 when City Attorney Elizabeth Mitchell handed this over in the course of your civil suit against Notaro, Gregozek et al.

But let's not flash forward years later, when that very strangely dated supplemental pops up for the first time ,when it's handed over in discovery for the civil suit filed against Gregozek et al.

Let's get back to the minutes and March 23rd 2009

Notes I took at that time:
Mon 03/23/2009Judge: Georgina Rizc Clerk: Susan Rios Reporter: Karen
     Algorri Prosecutor: Jennifer Waxler Judge Ricz will not allow me to be pro
     per for this sudden(instant?) hearing and I comply as I don't know how it
     works. Mr. Patel is forced on me but he allows me to speak. Advanced from
     4/16/09 to 3/23/09 because I am fed up with it taking so long and I don't
     want Mr. Patel because Mr. Patel has told me that "there is a conflict of
     interest" I have complained to them about Nicky Meehan and chose to be pro
     per rather than having Ms. Tawn. I now know for sure that the PD is not
     there for me. I only allowed Patel because the discovery said that four
     new charges were filed on .... and Georgina Ricz ordered that I have him
     to fight the two new charges that arose in an instant motion.   0
     Mon 03/23/2009There I say before initialing two parts of the farretta that
     indicate I'm not sure I know my charges. I say that according to the
     discovery 4 charges have been added by a Kelly Boyer. This prompts Waxler
     and another Unnamed prosecutor to scramble and they say (get trancscript)
     that they indeed have new charges. Ricz says that she will not grant the
     farretta until I am done with Judge Bork on this hearing. The Prosecutor
     offers that this can wait till 4/16/09 but I want it over with and to see
     this new discovery that is shown me by an unnamed prosecutor(black curly
     hair, would recognize) Go to court 50 - prosectution gets granted what it
     wants - no genuine argument(get transcript from Gail Davidson) "The
     defendant waives further arraignment" Don't believe this happened.
     "Ordered back for further hearing" go back to court and have farretta
     granted. Get Discovery and it is identical to the discovery shown by the
     prosecutor with the curly black hair. Faretta is submitted and filed No
     stipulations to what judge or if ok to have different judge. No mention of
     TCIS entry. No true sense of what happenned and how they plan to prove
     such charges.   0
     Mon 03/23/2009There I say before initialing two parts of the farretta that
     indicate I'm not sure I know my charges. I say that according to the
     discovery 4 charges have been added by a Kelly Boyer. This prompts Waxler
     and another Unnamed prosecutor to scramble and they say (get trancscript)
     that they indeed have new charges. Ricz says that she will not grant the
     farretta until I am done with Judge Bork on this hearing. The Prosecutor
     offers that this can wait till 4/16/09 but I want it over with and to see
     this new discovery that is shown me by an unnamed prosecutor(black curly
     hair, would recognize) Go to court 50 - prosectution gets granted what it
     wants - no genuine argument(get transcript from Gail Davidson) "The
     defendant waives further arraignment" Don't believe this happened.
     "Ordered back for further hearing" go back to court and have farretta
     granted. Get Discovery and it is identical to the discovery shown by the
     prosecutor with the curly black hair. Faretta is submitted and filed No
     stipulations to what judge or if ok to have different judge. No mention of
     TCIS entry. No true sense of what happenned and how they plan to prove
     such charges.   0
 now it's March 23rd 2009 and I go into court now with discovery in hand, and in that discovery I see this:


and the search warrants. Exigent circumstance search warrants?

past PDF of all the warrants for this time period

and I now something very wrong is going on on the other side. And when I get to court again I realize more things wrong.  The judge, Georgina Ricz is telling me that there is no evidence in the minutes that I filled out and was granted a farretta motion.

I am told I have no choice but to fill out another farretta motion and as I'm doing it I notice that one thing I must initial says that I know my charges but since I saw this 

Action Taken: As you can see - four counts 273.6 PC filed by CA Boyer

Cleared by arrest? No charges added much less an arrest

So after finally having access to the discovery I say to Judge Griczk - " I can't initial this part cause this document(above) says that Kelly Boyer added four charges on January 27th 2009, but here we are nearly two months later and nobody told me this. 

Insert both farretta's. show the part where It says "must know their charges"

What does this statement provoke....

Well, I then watch Jennifer Waxler and another city attorney ruffling loudly through a bunch of papers. After some time Waxler's say, " Yes we have charges and 
Upon me questioning what charges I now faced in light of the recent disscovery given me on March 1212th 2009, Jennifer Waxler and some other city attorney said Your honor we'd be happy to wait til the next hearing - April 16th 2009.

And I go know I' need to know what charges if any I'm facng  started rifling through some papers and they don''t show me the papers but soon were are sent to the court room of Terry Bork and though I have now signed two farretta motions,. One for Villar. Now one For Gricik.... GRicik rules that I can't be pro per for this and Kratu Patel accompanies me to Terry Bork's courtroom. There Kratu says you can't do anything about this. Just plead not guilty. And so I did. Later in discovery this would be produced as the paper work behind the addition of not  4 but now 2 charges. And, different charges than those listed by Gregozek as added by Kelly Boyer.

Remember this- 

Note the date- March 12th on the left hand corner
Now, after being sent to Terry Bork- this was added 

Let's look at that a little closer -

And here is the judge's notes from that day:

And so instead of at the January 29th 2009 pretrial or at the March 12th Pretrial - and only upon my statemnt that due to recent discovery I see I'm somehow facing four more charges does Jennifer Waxler(not Kelly Boyer) add TWO charges.

Two charges now amended and approved by Terry Bork  Did I wave arraignment. Well I sure don't remember that. Note that there is no discussion of raising bail considering the addition now of two charges. As usual, the public defenders office refuses to challenge the prosecutors.

The series of events.
1) letter from Seivers to Gregozek and Kelly Boyer urging them to begin getting search warrants and to add charges

2) Gregozek does exactly what Sievers requests

3) Gregozek begins to submit 4 search warrants that are premised on fraud and perjury. He will repeat the now long disproven lies told to him by 
 First Allison Sievers commands John Gregozek and Kelly Boyer to add charges and begin a series of search warrants. Then Gregzoek follows her commands and puts in this report

That he did this and that and vague this and that and upon viewing his discoveries(obtained by search warrants reserved for pedophiles and terrorist) Kelly Boyer is impressed enough to add four criminal charges of violating a restraining order and as of January 29 I am facing 5 charges and can face up to five years in jail and by all logic- should be given a much higher bail situation than Own Recognizance.

But none of that happens and Jennifer Waxler wants to wait for April 16th even to add whatever it is she sees fit to add.

So now with absolutely no fight on Kratu "You have a conflict of interest with the Public defenders office' I now face uh.... three charges

These are the two charges.

(explain the charges and how they make ABSOULTEY NO SENSE)

So what do I do. I go home knowing that not only is something very odd with the minute orders (due to the farretta I didn't know of the other "oddities" till much later but that John Gregozek is now lying to judges in order to get exigent circumstance search warrant and 3 o rmore have been executed. I did not know of Allison Sievers letters to him and kelly until four years later but I knew that Gregozek was trying to frame me in some way and that something was very wrong with his connection to Lavely and Singer. I knew that without any possible evidence of a crime somehow Waxler saw fit to add two charges. It also took me a long time to get it that Kelly Boyer must have refused to add any charges based on Gregozek's "evidence." 

I also knew that my sister just sued Notaro for defamation and Lavelya nd Singer were back in the pitcure. Now I suspect that the reason they tried to add meritless/bogus/lawless charges was retaliation but we'll have to get to that in more detail later.

I can say and I feel very confident you will agree, these two charges or those four charges never added by Boyer, make no sense. And, I made that clear to anyone who would listen, including the judges I saw or the prosecutors. " These charges make no sense."

Remember that, please, as that sensible statement, "These charges make no sense" would set the stage of the most malicious(and insane) stage of this already very malicious prosecution.

It was clear that facing special circumstance search warrants and charges that made no sense- we were over our heads. I say we because I am very close to my mother and sister and we do and experience almost everything together. So we got into gear and realized we had to shell out money for a private lawyer. We called around and settled on Howard Williams. Howard Williams asked for a meeting.

At that meeting, in order for him to close the 4K deal. he told me these kinds of things. Her'es just a one email 

So as of April 16 2009, I felt very lucky to have a private lawyer who wanted to sue them the minute he freed me from this .... what was it. 

I'd just learned that when you have a laywer and it's a misdemeanor you don't have to even go to cour tand I'd been to court now how many times... including the restraining order hearing.... May 28,. september 24. october 16, november 6, december 11, january 29, march 12 may 23-


and so I stupidly would take advantage of the luxuries I was now afforded and hoped to get the defense I read about and saw on TV and in the movies - zealous. Stupidly because Howard L. Willams did not represent me in any zealous way as you will seel.

Howard appeared to do more than Franica was doing at first. Actually he only did appear to more in retrospect because I was never told that Franica had filed that terrific looking discovery motion. She didn't tell me and there were no clues of it on the minute order. Howard also told me at some time that he filed a discovery motion but he never told me of any follow up other than this:

Later on when I pressed him he told me he'd filed this. And after the trial was over, and I picked up the file, I did find this there.

Howard never told me of any discovery given him in response to this form letter style discovery motion where he crossed out Stanislaus County and wrote in Los Angeles. 

Let's get back to the discovery related to the time period of Howard's representation.

Ok, for whatever reason Howard did not tell me he filed this and no evidence existed on any record, to clue me in.

Let's stick to the minutes , must find page 5 but here are the trancripts of those dates

Page 5- can't find page five of minutes. will though.. just takes a little extra word . gonna insert this from another post for the time being-

April 16th 2009

sloppy form motion. letter by waxler telling williams about who Sam Moreno is.

May 14th 2009 -

Let's break into down in the seperate days
Let's break that down  

June 17th 2009 short trancript minutes  

HMMMMM, I was not aware of anything happening on 7/20/09 and this minute order sure is mysterious/ dubioius as hell. 

Big question to ask yourself - Do any of these minute orders mention that any filing of a defense motion or a heairng was scheduled or took place on the motion to traverse.

The original purpose of the hearing was something called, a hearing on the "Motion to Traverse the warrants." Well, that's what I was told. I was also told that since the city attorney had sent Howard Williams the opposition in an "untimely" manner," Howard Williams would have to ask for a continuance.

 The night before the emails, Howard L. Williams, emailed me that he had just received a 39 page motion and therefore could not be prepared for he next day, since it was delivered the night before after business hours. Though it would turn out to be true that the city attorneys did fax him an opposition motion, after 5 P.M, this was the entirety of the motion with the city's illegal search warrants attached. The attachment of the highly illegal search warrants would not lead an ethical lawyer to characterize the fax he relieved as a "39 page motion."

So, that's just a tiny bit of the backstory of the days before this "hearing." 

You had the prosecutors in once corner. You had the defense attorneys in another. A judge in the middle.

For the state - Jennifer Waxler.
 For the defense- Jason Leiber standing in for Howard Williams, without notice to me that this would be the case.

In the middle- Judge Mary Lou Villar (newly appointed by Schwarzenegger judge and Anthony Villargrossa's sister)

Image result for mary lou villar

The hearing in black and white. Two unrecorded sidebars included.

The evidence that Waxler presented to substantiate her request - that I be remanded to jail- by Judge Mary Lou Villar...

That in 2005, 2 years, before I ever heard the name "Tig" Notaro, on  a stat counter user forum, I or my sister was somehow writing Notaro who we did not know and she knows none of us knew each other- well, this lauren d was going undercover in some way to tell Notaro.... Me and my sister ... In 2005, I'd not only not heard of Notaro but did not know about stat counters till I started a blog in 2008.

So that is why Jenniffer Waxler requested either an arrest warrant or a bench warrant on that day?

In 2005, someone on a message board somewhere and with the screenname Lauren D had said online to Notaro(who is in a stat counter uh discussion we must presume) Me and my sister saw your show...

note the ellipsis. It is not mine as you'll see below.

take that in...

Guess what, readers, that is no possible for many reasons...

1) we had no idea who "Tig Notaro" was in 2005.
2)We have never remotely gone on a stat counter discussion forum and my sister would not use the name lauren d
3)and are we to assume that we were then fans of Notaro who uh uh... thought we'd get our uh compliment across on a stat counter message board? IN 2005?
4)VERY IMPORTANLY we lived in Austin Texas in 2005 or NY and how would they trace any ip adress. it certainly wasn' the IP of our L.A computer.
5) This is insane... Jennifer Waxler saw fit to delete whatever this Lauren D said on some computer message board that someone was used to transmit illegal messages8
6) of course no one transmitted messages to Notaro but had they in 2005... was there a restraining order in place?
7)Why on earth, on this date, was Jennifer Waxler and Felise Kalpakian with the help of John Gregozek trying to defraud the Mayor's sister some more. They already had defrauded her plenty and would do it againt
7) please ask yourself what became of this and please ask yourself if any of this was put on any record except for the transcript I had to pay plenty of money for.
8)their is no dispute that we had no idea who Notaro was before 2007 and there is not dispute that no orders of any kind existed and there is no dispute that the ip we see there is not our and in no way could be our... And it is not in dispute that my sister's name is Lauren and her middle name is Joy and her last name starts with S....

Take in the fact that Gregozek is clearly falsifying documents that make no sense even. What sort of plausible deniability Waxler can theoretically claim is more confusing than with John Gregozek,
 because she would confirm to the judge on the record(who knows what she'd say in another of those illegal ex parte unrecorded sidebars- that the ip matched up to our house.. Was she told this by Gregozek, and bought it without thought, or did she knowingly lie and lie to the court, in order to terrorize me again with fake allegations and threats of jail as retatiation for me not taking their plea bargains and for my sister filing a lawsuit a month before? A lawsuit where Mathilde "Tig" Notaro was represented by Allison Hart Siever of Marty Singer's infamous, Lavely and Singer.

There is so much wrong with these two documents, that it hurts.

This is the allegation that 2 years before I'd ever heard the name "Tig Notaro" my sister lauren Joy spitzberg was what.... haunting a stat counter, They matched Ip's to a communication made years before? That is fraud of the ugliest order. Note there never was a hearing on this and no hearing dae was set according to the minute order, which does indicate complicity with the Judge and Clerk in that court.

note the date ... on top of the docket pages related to Howard Williams and Leiber and Leiber's representation -

NOTE how there is no mention of any cancelled hearing or anything to do with the August 4th 2009 hearing that Judge Villar was kind enough to schedule instead of having me jailed for no good reason?

traverese motion
kalpakians' opposition motion
Bozo letters 
howards letters
letters to frank towers etc

but I didn't believe him because by then he couldn't be believed. ( insert emails and other evidence)

Page 4-  March 23rd 2009

with no new charges but charging documents and with no motions put on the calender but motions exisiting we welcome March 23rd

I recently came across this blog

I think it can serve as some backdrop to why my gut and brain instinct makes me conclude that Officer Jacqueline Montalvo was murdered - in order to maintain the arrangement described in that blog. An arrangement that was making a lot of people very rich and an arrangement that would have landed in jail, had it been revealed. I have spoken to many since my OR-DEAL and all agree that such conclusions are more likely than not.

This is the part of the story, that is hardest tell . To insinuate that a key witness in my defense was murdered for what, by all appearances, was a tiny insignificant misdemeanor? What possible testimony could Officer Montalvo give that would justify the intervention of murderers? What kind of stakes could exist to even entertain the idea that an LAPD officer might get murdered in the course of a misdemeanor case?

 So much of the story seems too insane to believe, on the surface. And, though the case is full of insanity- that is not because of me.

Surfaces obscured a lot in  Case 8CA10541. This turned out to be a case where Alissa Malzman Sterling

 said this about Martin Boags

(the city attorney assigned the case a year in. give him a google. WHOA. Not only did he unbench his father, Charles Boags, but since his deeply evil choices in this case - his mother, sister and mother all died untimely deaths.)

Anyway, Sterling said this about Boags:

"He is trying to make his name on your case." Alissa then added, "I'm trying to make my name on your case too." She then paused to say, " But that is wrong. This is not about me. You are being maliciously prosecuted."

Nice, I guess, that she was honest, and that she regarded my role, for a sec, but this assertion,"you are being maliciously prosecuted," did not prompt Malzman to file the many appropriate motions to stop this malicious prosecution. She did not get out to the press. She also told me, " My mother is outraged by your case," but again, this did not prompt her to try and remedy the outrages, in any real way.
She did not motion for a bail hearing or to traverse the warrants. She did not demand that a "collaterally attack on the validity of the restraining order take place" long after she knew that the order was obtained by fraud and perjury. And, she did not stop and agree to tell me why ON EARTH would this seemingly tiny misdemeanor case make anyone's names. She said it cause she knew something big but as a total non insider I was to be kept in the dark of why Martin Boags and then her had saw career making potential in this shitty little case.

The four months that she was aware of the case and then was the defense lawyer for the case -she did nothing but try to win some charges so she could put it on her resume. Mid trial ,when the comedian false witness, Martha Kelly, were on the stand, Sterling looked at me and said, "You are being railroaded." She proceeded to tell me that she could tell that, "they are all being coached." But, that too didn't prompt her to take the actions one would expect from any defense attorney who has made it known to the defendant that not only was she being, "maliciously prosecuted," but now was about to get railroaded.

She went on to try to make her name, and at the same time - to not make enough waves - to compromise her career. How else to explain her leaving out such astoundingly important details such as the fact that only after Notaro was served with a defamation lawsuit did she suddenly remember a now 18 day old crime? How to explain how Alissa Malzman Sterling failed to ask Martha Kelly, Jeff Klinger, Jackie Kashian, and John Gregozek about the fact that the three comedians had all been flown to Washington D.C right before trial was expected to happen- to perform at Tig Notaro's, "Bentzen Ball." (Now, it's been learned that the Bentzen Ball was funded by Nick Kroll as a means to get these three low level comedians to find the inspiration to lie in a court of law at a criminal trial) Oh, he's crafty that boy. Jules Kroll is proud.

It all does sound insane. As a sane person, I am keenly aware, of things that sound insane. To claim that a police officer was murdered in your case, is as outlandish, as it gets. But, stick with me to see that it is rooted in fact and evidence.

Why would Nick Kroll even consider creating a comedy festival to assure false testimony? Why would Boags or Malzman feel they could make their names on Case 8CA10542? Why would the stakes be so high?

There are a million other whys in the cases, I've had to endure over the years, but let's try to stick to Officer Montalvo and what we can and cannot prove.

We can prove that Officer Montalvo was to a witness for my defense.

Let's look at that closer - 

(We should have much more proof since she talked to Alissa Malzman in person, and Malzman should have a signed statement and she should hand that over to me, but since as she admitted, " I work for the city, Alisa" she would not hand me this statement. But, I do have the minutes

Very interestingly, a month before Montalvo said she'd be my witness, Martin Boags included Officer Montalvo as a prosecution witness. 
Look at line 10. There is she. Interestingly only Gregozek and some Kroll con artist Sam Moreno showed up at trial. Hoffman, Defoe and Badar were nowhere to be found. Only three richly rewarded low level comedians, Notaro, John Gregozek and Sam Moreno(who know is the head of security for Fox Studios)

That witness list was drafted on January 20th 2010, and as you can see in these "minutes" Officer Montalvo came into court on February 22nd 2010 to talk to Alissa Malzman and the proseuctors.

 All I am left with here is Alissa Malzman's words to me about how Montalvo came tocourt to tell the prosecution and her that she never wrote any police report or incident report on April 29th 2008, because she did not think any crime was committed. This was very strange considering that Detective John Gregozek had written a police report where he had included an incident number - here it is

Let's zoom in on that:

Please, take note of the number ( 0804300005196)

What if I told you that no such number or incident report exists ? What if I told you that Montavlo did not draft any incident report cause she though there was no incident and therefore Gregozek would have to have falsified a number for a report? 

A year and 5 months after Gregozek drafted that report, for whatever exact reasons, Kelly Boyer and Jennifer Waxler and any other associated city attorneys were taken off the case or asked to be removed from the case - the son of Disgraced judge Charles Boags' son, Martin Boags, was put on the case(As of September 9th 2009. As an aside- Martin Boags was the son who disgraced his father)

So as of September 9th 2009, Martin Boags is given this now year old case and what does he do... something very reasonable... something everyone else should have done...

He orders the documents that would naturally accompany the accusations that

1) Police were called and came on April 12 2008 after lockdown of the Largo club for 1-3 hours.

2) The minutes said an arrest took place on April 29th 2008 so you know.. get those records

3) Get the incident report and 911 calls that would exist for all those sworn to incidents(at this point there had been 6 search warrants so these matters were indeed sworn to, under oath.

Let's not deal with how every since allegation in his April 30th 2008 report was shown to be false. Let's just show you what Martin Boags was faced with on September 14th 2009, when assuming that John Gregozek wouldn't lie to him and then many judges in the subsequent search warrants- 

The fact that Martin Boags even ordered what should have proved VERY exculpatory is confusing. Up till then such things were assumed true on Gregozek's word. And, then such evidence would be handed to me, after trial... So who is Martin Boags and if he ordered it and therefore made it available ultimately to the defense- well, maybe he's the prosecutor who will finally step in and put the breaks on what had turned into a baseless and malicious prosecution.

But, that did not happen. Upon seeing that Gregozek had lied to him  and the other city attorney's up to that point( Phyliss Henderson, Bernie Brown, Felise Cohen Kalpakian, Jennifer Waxler, Kelly Boyer) Marting Boag's was duty bound to, at the very least, call John Gregozek and say, "What the fuck is wrong here. Do you have the dates wrong? Why does it say no incident report was taken by Montalvo or Badar much less an arrest. Why do Notaro and now three witnesses( Kevin Seccia, Mark Flanagan, and Micheal Griffee) say that a call was made to 911 on the night of April 12th 2008, and why did you swear under oath in your search warrants, Gregozek, that this has all been verified... if these documents say that none of this happened?!

Or maybe he did do that? And so what would Martin Boag's next move have to be?

1) absent any logical excuse- complain to some higher up that John Gregozek was falsifying reports and perjuring himself under oath for obscure comedian, "Tig" Notaro. 

2) Immediately, contact my lawyer or me(as I had to be my own lawyer at that time) and begin to talk of settelment since for a year now I'd been coming to court on a bi-monthly or monthly basis to stand accused of crimes. 

What steps did Martin Boags take upon learning that not only had Notaro and certain witnesses been lying like crazy but that Detective John Gregozek was making great efforts to railroad someone-- We'll get to that... The answers are complicated and require a lot of context.
The short answer is that he decided upon a competency scheme whereby the goal was to derail the trial by having me declared too insane to stand trial.

Let's flash forward to February 22nd 2010.  the competency scheme, the 18 man raid, and the 31 days of illegal jailing(coercive confinement) have come and gone. The intent of all those devices either failed or were foiled in spectacular ways, and here I am scheduled for trial on 7 counts( four of those counts added a month before by .... Martin Boags)

And, on this day Officer Montalvo though listed as a prosecution witness( see image above) has "turned." turned on the prosecution and Gregozek... No. Sorry, guys... turns out she's a defense witness who will potentially attest that something is very very wrong here. Her fellow police officers, John Gregozek and James Hoffman(we'll get to him too) have not only set up a prosecution that never should have taken place, but they have recently "affied" to these invented "set of facts." Hmmm. Hmmmm. Hmmmm. And, all along she was available to bear witness to this and no one contacted her. And now she might or might not have found out that she is called in to be a prosecution witness. 

So, she does this... She comes to court to tell her truth and the truth...

Four days days after that bombshell, Officer Montalvo's 2011 Infiniti lost all control and went over a divider and she was dead.

 At first, they said there was no smell of alcohol at the scene. Later articles would say she in fact was very drunk. This was after the medical examiner got involved and did an autopsy, see.

Okay, if you are still reading... WHOA, right? That's one terrible piece of news for her, her family and you. I mean this is a really key witness. 

At the time, I had to assume that this was just another very strange occurrence in a case full of strange circumstances and occurrences.

Years later, these comments were left on an article written about Montalvo's untimely death. All the comments can be found here, (17)

But, I've only pasted the once that are the most uh... uh... compelling.

LAPD Officer· 290 weeks ago

She was not scheduled to testify in any case that had anything to do with the LAPD, just the normal patrol officer's criminal cases, that all officers testify to on a daily basis. No investigator will do a presumptive test on a deceased person. The victim/suspect is dead, they are not going anywhere and the coroner (who is very busy with pressing murder cases and others more important cases than an "accident" will do the most through test on the deceased.

LAPD Officer· 290 weeks ago

Oh and by the way... Police Officers are not above the law, they are susceptible to the same weakness and frailties that all human beings are. She was drunk, she drove drunk and she paid the ultimate price. That is not a reflection on her profession, but in her choices that day. We all make bad choices and we all (police or not) pay for them sooner or later.

JR· 95 weeks ago

Jacqueline ate and drank (with a male off duty officer) for several hours at a bar in Chino Hills before she got into her car and crashed. I was there with friends. There is no conspiracy here.

JR· 95 weeks ago

Jacqueline ate and then drank for several hours at a popular hot spot in Chino Hills immediately before the crash. I was there with friends. The male off-duty officer she was drinking with received the ominous phone call while still at the bar. There is no conspiracy here, just an unfortunate event.

anonymoussorta· 86 weeks ago

Despite all this, of course it could all be a coincidence. Surely, Officer Montalvo wasn't murdered for what seems such a small case.

Let's take a look at what Officer Montalvo's testimony could have engendered -

 She was going against this prosecution, and she was going to have to say that John Gregozek and James Hoffman with the blessing of their supervisor, Jeffrey Dunn, had falsified a number in an effort to essentially rail road me, and have the city attorney bring unwarranted criminal charges. Then, when no plea was accepted by me - seven search warrants with these exact same false allegations, sworn to by Detective John Gregozek and then James Hoffman. 

So we know that Gregozek, Hoffman, Dunn, have now behaved corruptly. But why?

Why was this "Elite Unit," working so so hard( evidence of that, coming) to turn me into a stalker, a creep, and a criminal? Long after they knew everything told to them by Mathilde Notaro and Stef Willen(the only "witnesses" they would ever claim to talk to(via phone) they persisted and persisted, using the public's money, to close the deal.

What deal. Why would they want to close any deal. Why they were on such a case, in the first place, is also a good question.  According to Gregozek, they were on the case because I sued Notaro for defamation.

"What could I do. You sued her." he said to my mother when she asked him why he was doing what he was doing.

Because I sued her for defamation.... I did sue her for defamation. Who were the lawyers that would represent her in that suit - Lavely and Singer. Allison Hart Sievers. Marty Singer's firm. Allison Hart Sievers is often co- counsel with Marty Singer

Perhaps you've heard of Lavely and Singer. There's a better chance you've heard of Marty Singer. 

You see, Marty Singer, is infamous. Infamous for cleaning up the messes of assorted big name celebrities, politicians, financial entities.

Here's a few names: George Soros, Harry Reid, The Julius Baer Bank(against Wikileaks) Arnold Shwartzenegger, Charlie Sheen, Sylvester Stallone, Demi Moore, Jennifer Aniston, Kim Kardashian, Chris Rock. .... Tig Notaro.

One of these things is not like the other... Tig Notaro? Who is that,many still say. But back in 2008 till 2011... back before she became semi obscure by claiming cancer... everyone said,"Who is that and how can she afford Marty Singer?"

Back when this started, Notaro was a semi succesful comedian. Mostly known for being friends with Sarah Silverman and other bigger names in "Alternative Comedy."

What I didn't know, and most anyone would not know is that Notaro had another very wealthy and connected friend named Nick Kroll. And I sure didn't know that Nick Kroll had a big plan to get famous. Favor for Favor, and to use his impressive connections. He'd composed a "list" and he'd write checks to those on the list or send them on fancy vacations, take them on one of his father's private jets, and in return, they would cast him or book him on assorted talk shows. He'd also hit up on his family's press contacts to get glowing articles and mentions. Much of that is in the Kroll Show Review link below. 

At the time, I had never heard the name Nick Kroll. But, soon in I saw that he was listed as a key witness to the events of April 29th 2008. Then, later he would submit a vicious and false statement to the prosecutors two months before trial, when Martin Boags was aiming to add more charges in order to terrorize me into a plea bargain.

As you can see, he  is mentioned - look at April 29th 2008.

And here he is listed  5th on this witness list.

 Oddly, this is the first time since the first fraud police report, that he is mentioned. His statement to the prosecutor is being sought by Alissa Malzman -who so far refuses to hand over many things. I do have a copy in an old computer that died and the minute I get the money I will retrieve it.

But, for now, we know that Notaro or Kroll have placed Nick Kroll at the alleged incident of April 29th 2008 -
Notaro alleges that many crimes occurred. pushing patrons. disorderly conduct, menacing, trespassing, assault, battery, stalking, harassment etc.

Nick Kroll will be a witness, he has assured the prosecutors and police. Gregozek will submit that all of their allegations are true. Based on what? Based on his phone chats with Mathilde "Tig" Ntoaro and Stef Laurel Willen - nothing more - as admitted in subsequent interrogatories - (paste here)

Yet, the trained professionals - Officers and Montalvo - don't believe any of that. After talking to Notaro and whomever else Notaro had told her to talk to, Montalvo gave a quizzical smile and then conferred with Officer Badar - this prompted Badar to say, " Ladies you are free to go home. There's been no crime here."  Then Badar said something that we could not make sense of for a long time -
" If I were you, I'd get a lawyer."

In the same document please note that the names of Montalvo and Badar are omitted,

of the other alleged officers that had to come to a "scene" Patrol officers only...

Here it's the police were called and they arrived . we know that not only did no police arrive, no police were ever called. So, this is all very fishy. invented incidences. invented cops. invented incident numbers. Considering the accusation made related to that date - The owner had to lockdown the club for an hour - why wouldn't police be called. Later, Notaro would say that the club was, "on lockdown for 3 hours" as my sister and I tried to break in repeatedly.

All for an unknown comic with the irritating name of "Tig" Notaro?

No. All for,  and all due to Nick Kroll's involvement and counsel throughout.

This is how that went down: Notaro made a bad choice. She hated me for no reason, that I can understand and she decided to create ugly lies about me. When I learned of this, I tried to appeal to her and make her stop doing this. She wouldn't and so my sister and I took legal and unthreatening measures to have her cut it out. Again, she made the choice to continue with her smear campaign.

Not knowing what to do, I went online and wrote some humorous things on the message board, Datalounge. Very soon in tons of information was coming out of the posters there. In short, Notaro was a known creep. A liar. Offline I met two comedians who described Notaro as a "predator." A friend of Notaro's from Denver contacted by e-mail and told me Notaro was a sociopath and she knew Willen and didn't see her as a sociopath, but as an obsessed loon, whose whole life revolved around Notaro.

Understandably, Notaro didn't like to see these kinds of things online. She had long sought to be famous. Sometime during this week long time period, her friend, Nick Kroll, told her she needed to save her "brand." To do so he counseled her she needed Marty Singer and the law firm of Lavely and Singer. They would hook her up with dirty cops in the Threat Management Unit. They'd make sure that her interests were protected.

First step was for Lavely and Singer and Allison Hart Sievers(Or Marty Singer since we have not been given the "cease and desist" letters) to take down anything negative written about Notaro, from datalounge. The webmaster, seeing Marty Singer's notoriously threatening and over the top letters, complied. But, this didn't stop me or the others from talking about Notaro. Her removal of threads had the "Streisand effect," and she likely wanted to do something to stop it.

Since Notaro is a sociopath, it never occurred to her to apologize profusely for her decision to start a vicious smear campaign against a stranger. No. She would let Marty Singer and Nick Kroll take care of it. The Threat Management Unit recognized that she and Willen were liars and did not want anything more to do with this matter, after May 7th 2008. But, when I dared sue Notaro for trying to ruin my life by deeply damaging defamation-- Lavely and Singer and the Threat Management Unit were brought back into the picture.

Here is a link, written by an unbiased individual that sums up what is going on with Marty Singer and the Threat Management Unit.

How did she afford Marty Singer's 500 - 800 an hour fees? Well, Nick Kroll's family is so rich and connected that he either paid them or Singer owed him some favor, and no one had to pay.

Franica Tawn(a public defender, assigned early on) told me, "Notaro's lawyers are contacting the prosecutors a lot... very interesting. She refused to elaborate, when I asked her what that means.

Here's the stuff that I got, over time, that evidences Lavely and Singer's contacts with Gregozek and the prosecutors. Interestinlgy, Kelly Boyer would not add the charges, Allison Hart Sievers demanded and they had to get notoriously dirty prosecutors like Jennifer Waxler, Felise "Backfat" Kalpakian, and Martin Boags(a man who unbenched his own father - Judge Charles Boags)

Look how charges and search warrants are demanded: 

Look how Mathilde, "Tig" Notaro is able to get out of a subpoeona when Lavely and Singer is involved.

Ramirez let Notaro out of the subpoena. Kelly Boyer(god bless her) refused to add any charges because none of this was true and there never was any evidence this was true. Jennifer Waxler did submit to Lavely and Singer's wishes and that is an interesting bit of insane corruption by the City Attorney of Los Angeles.

How connected and wealthy is this Nick Kroll?

Well, this letter from Internal Affairs is not fair,

and not one thing in this case, was fair. In fact, it was criminal and it was evil, because at the time of all this began, Bill Bratton,was a high level employee of Nick Kroll's father, Jules Kroll. All the judges, and prosecutors and cops could be scouted by Jules Kroll and be on easy street.

This in particular:
In the late 1970s, he(Jules Kroll) helped create a new market for corporate investigations. A onetime Manhattan assistant district attorney, he realized that corporations would pay big for an investigative firm that could dig out employee fraud and other malfeasance.He recruited a savvy coterie of former CIA spies, FBI agents, and prosecutors by paying them as much as twice their public-sector salaries.

But there's more to Kroll's success than waving big paychecks at top talent. He has long inspired loyalty among his staff by remembering the names of even the lowliest clerical workers. He once even lent one promising young investigator the downpayment for his house. The personable Kroll is an avid schmoozer, too.

Though, Charlie Beck would sign off to the lawless and unfair responses to my internal affairs complaints

Now Ray Kelly also has been hired by Kroll.  The allegations made to the Internal Affairs were clearly very valid. There can be no dispute that John Gregozek, James Hoffman and Sam Moreno lied under oath and that no search warrants were warranted, but were ordered by Allison Hart Sievers of Lavely and Singer and so the corrupt Gregozek complied

For some reason the main judge in my case, and a judge that made incredibly lawless ruling and statements, was mayor Villargroassas sister, Mary Lou Villar. Jules Kroll and Marty Singer are close associates and friends of Mayor Villargrossa. So is Charlie Beck.

Aside of the fact, that at that time, Nick Kroll was volunteering to bear false witness, Bratton was the cheif of Police. The mayor was a close friend and associate of Jules, Jeremy, and Lynn Kroll. So were all the judges, who were appointed by Arnold Shwartzenneger. Arnold Shwartezeneger was not only a client of Marty Singer(and liked Kroll Inc.) but I was told by a very reliable source that Shwartzenegger is very grateful to Marty Singer for covering up all his dirt, throughout the years, and so when it came time to appoint judges, Marty Singer was the one who decided.

Considering what I saw and experienced, I believe this to be absolutely true. The fact that all the lawless and corrupt judges in my case were recent Shwartzenneger appointees was something I noticed throughout - Judge Mary Lou Villar, Judge Georgina Ricz, Judge Samantha Jessner, Judge Karla Kerlin, Judge Robert Vanderet, Judge Maria Stratton. I won't even go into the search warrant judge(Craig Richman) cause they were likely just tricked by Gregozek et al. But, Craig Richman then showing up as  hearing judge is suspicious.

So, in short --- incredibly bad odds to get any justice. Cards stacked beyond belief. The power of Kroll, of Marty Singer, of the state(now those who are trying to please Marty Singer and Jules Kroll's son so they can get great jobs ASAP)

And, since they'd anticipated that I'd lay down and die, early on, the whole thing became a threatening mess to them...The set up described here

would face too much scrutiny. The civil suits, if the charges were dismissed, would entail a million dollar plus compensation, if ever heard by a jury in any civil rights case, that had to follow. Gregozek, Dunn, Defoe, Hoffman, Viramontes, and others in the LAPD's Threat Management were working as a "thug force." The new Anthony Pelicanos. The new Arneson( Google those names and note that Judge Karla Kerlin shows up too)

As of February 22nd 2010, the Stalinesque comptency plot had been foiled. The 31 days of illegal jailing(AKA coercive confinement) hadn't compelled me to take any plea bargain. After ordering the documents that proved that Notaro(and her witnesses Griffe, Seccia, and Mark Flanagan) had lied in a big way, Boags did not do the right thing - instead of calling into to the attention of the powers that be, and having it all dismissed with a settlement offer to compensate me and my family for this nightmare, they'd put us through, Martin Boags added four charges as a means to terrify me into accepting their plea.

As of February 22nd I was facing seven charges. Some serious, though all misdemeanors. I could have faced  7 years had I got Samantha Jessner, Robert Martinez, or Robert Vanderet as judges, because all three were trial judges, and they were and are, as corrupt as can be.

Enter Heidi Feigin, Sam Consuegra, Julius Quinn Roberts, Officer Jaqueline Montalvo- all coming to court to sign up as my witness... to testify, under oath, that none of what was alleged had happened. Quinn could have testified to the lie about the police coming. Sam would testify that there was no incident of any kind at the Tsunami coffee house, Feigin could testify that Notaro was a liar(her words, " why is she lying like this) and she could show that not only was Notaro lying but Gregozek et al, were perpetuating these lies to railroad me. And, very importantly, she could attest to the fact that someone was calling her( She thought it was Hunter Siedman- Notaro agent) but I don't think it was him. Heidi Feigin told Alissa Malzman Sterling that Heidi was now going to be an even better witness, because she was getting really "pissed off" that Notaro's agent was calling her repeatedly and saying, " Why are you testifying for the other side."

All that testimony (Which was squashed by a ruling that followed no law) would have exposed a lot.

But, let's focus on what Officer Montalvo could have brought to this terrible table - 

She could bear witness, that TMU detective, John Gregozek, had not only written out false statements by two clearly malicious woman, as gospel, but he'd falsified an incident number, to impart some ... I don't know. I know he falsified a number. He'd also either sought out Montalvo to try to get her to lie or he never sought her out. Either way, that was very damning for him and this unit. Jeffrey Dunn, and Hoffman and now the whole unit was involved

What else could Montalvo's testimony accomplish? 

Her testimony directly contradicted Nick Kroll's ugly lie filled testimony to the prosecutors. Had that come out, Nick Kroll's role as the ringleader in all of this would come out and it would not be good for Jules Kroll's son and his aspirations. He's wasted hundreds of thousand dollars of the city's money on some sick game.

It would not be good for Marty Singer. He'd terrorized and stolen from a holocaust survivor( My mother) It would not be good for the City Attorney, The DA(Richard Vagnozzi and the rest in Division 95) the Shwartezenner appointee judges- Kerlin, Jessner, Maria Stratton, Robert Vanderet, Mary Lou Villar et al. Division 95's dual ( and super sinister) purpose of terrorizing defendants into plea bargains.

Work in progress.... Still must work more on the Lauren D. part and a few others. But, if I die o natural or unnatural causes... best to just get it out...

Sad to see how John Gregozek not only hasn't been brought to justice, but still has his gun, and badge, and how instead of being in prison, he repeatedly has gotten away with putting innocent people in jail.

A recent google search shows that he is now a Sargent at L.A's South East Division.  Another google search shows that maybe a Sargent is not a demotion.

When you consider what John Gregozek's aims are, it must feel to him as a demotion.

Why? Because now John Gregozek can't work for Marty Singer (or Jules Kroll - both had pull in my case) and he can't fix cases for celebrities like Pauley Perrette, or wannabe celebrities like Tig Notaro ( when such wannabes happen to be considered as the best friends of Jules Kroll's son, Nick Kroll.)

 Since I am sure that this sausage faced menace to society,

 loved his cushy position at the LAPD's Threat Management Unit -where he got to rub shoulders with the rich and famous. Names like Selena Gomez, Mila Kunis, Jennifer Aniston- I'm sure he sees any other position but being a Detective at the Threat Managment as a step down.

No longer can he be the Steve Arneson to Anthony Pellicano and Marty Singer.

I hope that Gregozek's role in CASE 8CA1054, and how all the charges he pressed for were shown to be baseless, and the product of his unholy alliance with Jules Kroll's son Nick, and Marty Singer's law firm -  Lavely and Singer - had something to do with his removal.

What a strange little unit that is - Former head Gregory Boles now works for Kroll. Another former head, Robert Martin, retained Lavely and Singer for a defamation suit, awhile back. The most recent head of the TMU - Jeffrey Dunn- retired at the age of 45.

Detective on my case and the case of Coyote Shivers, Martha Defoe, Retired at 44 years old. Cletus moved to Missing Persons. Gregozek no longer in the unit.  All strange considering that this is a unit that officers would not leave or take early retirement from.

Forget about law or justice. Forget about the decimation of me and my family. What a waste of money, energy, manpower, resulted from Gregozek's errand boy to famed Los Angeles Entertainment firms policing style.

But, of course, I can't know the exact details of why he's gone... YET.

Maybe I'll get lucky and again get wind of some of the already striking shows of possible karma in my case: Martin Boags losing his mother, sister and wife in quick succession after my case was not "wrapped up" by him.  vicious character assassin, Harris Wittels, dead at 30. What very happened happened to con artist, pathological liar, perjurer, and very satisfied client of John Gregozek and Lavely and singer - Tig Notaro?

I was told by Stef Willen that Notaro despised her mother, and now that I believe that her mother dying in a freak part is the only part of her cancer tale that is true -- hard to know if she has felt any cosmic repercussions for her crimes. Stef Willen however made out like a bandit. She went from no resume to a fixed Mcsweeney's win( John Hodgman and a few others at Mcsweeney's made sure she won that, "column contest". Then Nick Kroll put her in a Funny or Die Video. Then Stef Willen who had zero credits to her name was suddenly on This American Life with Ira Glass.

Then, Nick Kroll pulled some more insane strings to make a non press person- who did no press work- an L.A Press award. Then, all these ill gotten gains were used to sway a literary agent to push Stef Willen's fraudulent accomplishments into turning her "Mcsweeney's Column" into a book deal.

But, let's get back to the star of this here post, John Gregozek

This blogger gets your name wrong, Gregozek... calls you Jim, but it's you, and he's right on about everything he figured out. Viramontes shows up in my case too. Also in a very dubious role. This blogger figured out what I figured out - You are the new Mark Arneson, and your unit is Pellicano's replacement.

Why do I want John Gregozek(and many others ) brought to justice?

Well, I allege that John Gregozek was the man chosen to make Tig Notaro, Stef Willen, and Nick Kroll's frauds official. He controlled the narrative and he chose to knowingly and willfully present a false and destructive(to me and my family) narrative in order to please those he thought could advance his dreams and goals.  I could do nothing for him and so he regarded me as an ant.

Who was he trying to please? Nick Kroll.

Nick Kroll that ugly kid on the League, and the abysmal "Kroll Show." The one who won the heart of Amy Poehler? So in love that they color coordinate yet!

Yes and No. Yes it's this Don Juan who now can call him self the star of a movie starring Rose Byrne and Bobby Carnavale.

 Nearly eight years ago, when I saw Nick Kroll's name listed as an eyewitness  to all sort of invented incidences, I gave him a google. I'd never heard that name until 2008, when his name was listed on Notaro's affidavit. Was on a cavemen show. cancelled. some youtube videos where he was appearing to try to be the very poor man's Sasha Baron Cohen.

Did not look one bit familiar though he put him self right near us ( my sister in particular)
Until his statement to the prosecutor on January 21st of 2010, he was never thought of. After the statement we realized he was one depraved liar.
Throughout the civil suits and all the years and fights that followed the dismissal of the charges on March 23rd 2010, Nick Kroll was seen as some loosely aligned creep. He never came to any court to swear to any of his lies, under oath.

Flash forward to us having to basically flee L.A because we knew then that the fix was in and forces were in place that made any peace or justice impossible.

In December of 2013 I'm reading an article unrelated to anything in my case... I see... "Kroll Securities"
I think... probably a common name... google and see this and this and this led to this

this is nearly identical.

son of Jules Kroll and current employer of past TMU supervisor, Gregory Boles , and Marty Singer- infamous fixer for guilty celebrity's or anyone who can pay his huge hourly fees.

On August 30th 2008, John Gregozek claims that a Mathilde Notaro contacted him by phone. Then he'd claim that on May 2nd 2008 he was summoned to the offices of Lavely and Singer to pick up, "Forums and E-mails."

This is all we were given as to Sargent Gregozek's "investigation" regarding the phone call from Mathilde Notaro

I can't know how this comes across to anyone seeing it, and not knowing the truth. I'm sure it looks scary. Maybe, some would see that a lot of this as suspicious, on its face. But, since I can't know I'll do my best to lay it out for you, because you are witnessing a fraud in action. A very ugly and wasteful fraud that would lead to more and more and more destructive fraud. 

The most compelling thing about this is that this was never filed with the restraining order court of Judge Gerald Rosenberg. Only some sloppy forms and a sloppy affidavit were filed with that court.

Gregozek did not show up to testify. No police officers of any kind show up to assist "Tig" Notaro with her vendetta on that day  - May 28th 2008.

And, by all evidence, after drafting these lies up, Gregozek and the other detectives from the LAPD's Threat Management Unit all had no intention of getting involved. After May 7th 2008, the matter, as far as they were concerned- was dropped. Had I listened to Gregozek and Hoffman's advice, " Just stay off the internet and your troubles will be over." Well, no that wouldn't have worked. Because later on after he'd press for the bogus charges and a city attorney would comply with one -violation of a court order- he'd tell my mother, " What could I do. You sued her didn't you." as the only response to her asking him how he could be doing this, when he knew that Notaro and Willen were lying since they had been caught in many lies way before the charge was added sometime in August of 2008.

Note how these were only submitted to the City attorney after the lawsuit against Notaro was filed. Report was taken on April 30th 2008 and charge for stalking was attempted after the lawsuit was filed on Notaro and called to the attention of her lawyers at Lavely and Singer. The stalking charge would be rejected as it should have been but flash forward a year and a few months later and a Martin Boags would file such a charge when faced with smoking gun exculpatory evidence of not just my innocence but of Gregozek and a few "witnesses" complicity in trying have Notaro win a conviction based on invented incidences and assorted false accusations

Exhibit to show Notaro is a liar and that the inclusion of the cases involving her sister can only hurt Notaro’s “case.”

3. a.Why doesn’t Notaro mention the “violence” of August 29,2008.
Did Alisa Spitzberg really ever harass, stalk or even bother Notaro? Did Lauren ever harass Notaro?

Is Notaro a liar who has lied under oath and under penalty of perjury?

Notaro’s statement to LAPD- as to the August 29, 2007 “incident.
In September 2007 - Spitzberg arrived at the coffee shop and confronted Willen and Notaro. Willen ignored Spitzberg and walked out of the shop with Notaro. Spitzberg stepped in front of Willen and said, “You trying to avoid me.” Willen ignored Spitzberg who then pushed Notaro.

Notaro and Willen left without reporting the incident.

Notaro statement to Spector –investigator for Public Defender
While sitting together and waiting at tsunamis café late one night for this deaf landlord to show up Notaro said that Alisa all of a sudden and surprisingly walked in. Notaro stated that Alisa immediately walked up to their table and “accused” them meaning herself and Willen of being together. Notaro stated Alisa then began yelling and cussing at the two of them. Notaro said is was very much a verbal tirade against the two of them. While Alisa continued yelling at both of them Notaro said a mini bottle of vodka fell out of one. of Spitzberg’s jacket pockets. At one point while all of this was going on Notaro said she then stood up and she was now standing right next to Alisa.

After standing up, Notaro stated that Alisa then Shoved her with both her hands, as well as she next said, “ are you Steph’s keeper.”
After that had occurred Notaro advised that both she and Willen then left this coffee shop, due to the fact they didn’t want any more violence to occur on Alisa’s part. As they quickly walked out of this coffee shop, Notaro said that Alisa continued to follow them out of this location on foot.
Sworn affidavit of Mathilde Notaro- as to the August 29, 2007 “incident.
In late August of 2007, I accompanied my friend Stephanie to the Tsunami Café in Silverlake, CA. Alisa Spitzberg approached us at our table and aggressively yelled insults at the two of us, including, “fucking dyke,.” “ugly.” “cunt,” “bitch.” Etc.
We ignored her and went outside, but she followed us and became angrier and more belilligerent. As I motioned for Stephanie to gather her belongings to leave, Alisa came closer and pushed me.

Court testimony of notaro describing August 29,2007



Willen’s Statement from Follow up investigation - august 29th 2007 “incident.”

Notaro waited with Willen at approximately 2000 hours, Spitzberg arrived at sat down next to Willen and Notaro.. Spitzberg appeared intoxicated and began interrupting and insulting Notaro and Willen. Spitzberg told Willen that she was “horrible and despicable.” And “how could I be so wrong about you.” Willen walked outside and spitzberg called Willen a, “ Dumb ugly dyke.” Spitzberg then pushed Notaro. Willen stepped between Notaro and Spitzberg, and Notaro suggested they leave. Notaro and Willen walked away while Spitzberg shouted insults at them.
Court testimony of willen as to august 29,2007- transcript --- pg. 20

And if she now Notaro contendes that the harassment started here, was there ever really harassment? Not according to Heidi Feigin “the agent” Notaro places right there and not according to Griffee,
Notaro From Police report –April 7.2008- 9 months later!

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 told Spitzberg that she did not want to talk to her. Spitzberg
continued staying in front of Notaro. Notaro asked security to remove Spitzberg.
Notaro’s statement in Affidavit- 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. Alisa interrupted saying “no you don’t remember me. I said, Yes the night we met you were being aggressive and you pushed me. I remember you and I don’t want to talk to you at all. Leave me alone. Alisa became quickly enraged and insisted repeatedly that I was lying. Because I was afraid it would escalate, I had Michael Griffee, the doorman at largo, escort her out of the building.

transcript testimony of Notaro of april 7 –gets date wrong but insignificant

So, by using "Tig" Notaro and Stef Willen's statements made to him "via phone." Gregozek tried and failed to get me charged with stalking after The lawsuit was served on Tig Notaro (post August 13th 2008)

Using the same now long disproven false allegations,  Gregozek would also try to file a violation of a restraining order charge. But for this charge he'd now tell the prosecutors and then the assorted judges(when he applied for 7 search warrants)

So now we have John Gregozek succeeding in getting Lavely and Singer client and Nick Kroll's "best and oldest comedy friend" not only getting Notaro "awarded" a restraining order but a bogus criminal charge wrought from a void restraining order ( void for many reasons:

and on october 16th 2008 an unassigned public defender, Nicky Meehan, approached me with great vigor - You've been offered a rare plea... you should take it.

Me: what

Nicky: Informal diversion. 12 or more classes or anger management.

Me: NO. not plea.


On that date, the city attorney filed the charge witihout even being given the restrainingorder. and though Gregozek would say that the order was served on me by court personell. that didn't happen. I was never served wit that order and Alissa Malzmana nd the other lawyers had a duty to do use that in my defense but did not.

On January 13th 2009, Gregozek was contacted again, by Marty Singer's right hand woman, Allison Sievers( of the Lavely and Singer law firm.)

These are the letters that we only made available to us in 2011, when they were handed over in discovery by unsavory City Attorney, Elizabeth Mitchell.

Add caption
This was only handed over in discovery, for a civil suit filed by me, my mother and my sister. A suit that by all evidence, and law - we should have won. Note that one page was not handed over. 

According to this document (dated February 3rd 2009 and faxed to someone on that same day) City Attorney Kelly Boyer, added four charges to the defendant(me) on January 27th 2009, based on what Allison Sievers ordered, and then we have to presume - the incriminating evidence found by Gregozek

Let's look at that closely

Action Taken - Four Counts 273.6 filed by CA Boyer( Right hand. last line)

Let's look closer at the supplemental information filed by John Gregozek(note no supervisor this time does not sign off and Gregozek himself does not sign it. What that exactly means - I do not know.)

Note that this was not given to me until March 12th 2009, and the public defender either did not have it or was not aware of it but no one told me that such a filing had occurred as of March 12th 2009, when I decided I had to be my own  lawyer and so "discovery" was given me. As of March 12th 2009, I only knew I was facing the one bogus charge

Anyway, back to the info supplied by Gregozek to someone. 

And, according to this same report,Gregozek proclaims that indeed Kelly Boyer did file such charges.

Okay, so anyone viewing this would think... Here's the chain of events-  

1)Notaro's private civil lawyer (who was representing her in the defamation suit against her.) is contacting "Kelly" and Gregozek to provide them with evidence that I am violating a restraining order. 
2) Gregozek does the leg work- get the warrants (see below) and sure of four crimes, presents such evidence to city attorney, Kelly Boyer.

3) City Attorney,Kelly Boyer, evaluates the evidence brought to her. We can assume that it what was discovered after numerous searches etc.  Gregozek hints at his work, but does not offer detail as to what he found. What she sees, gives her reason to add four criminal charges to the one, I then faced.

The next date would be January 29th 2009. On that date, there was a pretrial hearing in the case: On that Date, Kelly Boyer was the prosecutor, and did she add the four charges Gregozek said she did. Did she add any charges?

Let's make that bigger:

As you can see, no charges were added. Kelly Boyer was present, but she wasn't adding anything. What is that about?

So, January 29th 2009, came and went and I was not told of any charges, and had no clue that Lavely and Singer's errand boy, John Gregozek, had been conducting extensive searches - exigent circumstance searches.

I  had no clue on that date, and would have no clue until a month and a half later when, I noticed this the February 2nd report and then tons of page of search warrants - signed by a total of three judges.

Was there cause for such extreme measures?  Would disclosure of these records impede the investigation, and place the victim(s) and witness(es) in danger.

Gregozek writes them of an investigation in progress by the LAPD. That sounds very serious, doesn't it?

The truth of the matter is there was no "investigation."  There was no probable cause for any charge or any search warrants. There was a fix. There was a cover up. John Gregozek was working on the orders of Nick Kroll, and Marty Singer.  Because this was Judge Samantha Jessner, he knew he did not have to include one reason for such unusual and lawless warrants.

All Gregozek planned to do, and had to do, was impart that he was an expert. No evidence was needed. Just his presentation to Judge Samantha Jessner that he was an expert who not only guarded celebrities and other VIPS but HER.... 

Let's look at that a little closer - 

Here, Gregozek is telling these judges(there would be a few with these search warrants) that he's a big time expert. That's bad enough, cause as an expert he knows very well I'm no stalker and that by law, Notaro and him have been stalking me - filing false reports, harassing me using the criminal and civil courts etc. 

If that's not bad enough he is telling these judges - "Hey I protect you" if you need it.  How is it one bit relevant - "Which includes threats towards elected officials" plus the city worker part.

Mathilde Notaro had alleged an incident of violence to Gregozek. But very early on, that was shown to be a lie, when the manager of the coffee shop(where she'd invented violence and verbal tirades)

There is also an investigators report( will post as soon as I find it) In it Sam Consuegra seems spooked by something but he makes the excited utterance , " There was no violence that night."

Not to mention that she'd changed her statements to such a degree that it was clear, as early as May 28th 2008 that everything she and Willen were sayingafter report after report to judges and others - saying that Boyer filed four charges, over and over again.   what happened at the next pretrial hearing. What was Public Defender, Franica Tawn, doing during this time. What about Investigator Neil Spector.

I claimed that as of March 12th 2009, when I demanded discovery when I had to become my own lawyer, I had no clue that any more charges were added AND that I was not aware of any search warrants - here's your evidence that I could not have known about the search warrants.

How could I not know? By law I had to be notified - Well these were exigent circumstance warrants - approved by Judge Samantha Jessner, with no explanation as to why such extraordinary measures be taken- Remember there was no violence or evidence that if I found out.... the "victim" could be in an jeopardy. Nevertheless, an exigent search warrant or warrants, were conducted. there was a false allegation of violence that was now a year and half old and their was a known witness - Sam Conseugra- who had signed an affidavit saying there was no activity of any kind - no violence. No verbal argument. 

In fact, there was absolutely no probable cause. There was no reason other than a Lavely and Singer lawyer telling their errand boy, Johh Gregozek, to do this - 

Look what an errand boy he was.

 Check out May 6nd 2008- Picks up forums and emails from the offices of Lavely and singer. 

And, he had no idea who wrote anything and nothing ever written by me was in any way - criminal. None of these "forums and emails" were not only not shown to be even written by me, but nothing in these forums or emails were remotely criminal. Also, at a twelve day trial and throughout the 2 year long malicious prosecution - they were never introduced into evidence.

Look at the part in green: we see he knows he needs to use serial numbers. He responds to a residence and we must suppose that the residenc and not Notaro. They drive from downtown L.A with three detectives - Defoe now too. Hoffman. Gregozek. All the way to Santa Monica and only a residence will respond to them and Notaro will identify me by one photograph? So we have a talking residence or a silent residence who needs to be brought to court to be cross examined. I am kidding, reader ... I know that

And, errand boy to Lavely and Singer - John Gregozek- files the proof of service with the court - 

Note: Files nothing else. Filed not one document compared to this - filed by same Gregozek and same Lavely and Singer

And, something happens, where the TMU not want even their names listed. By all indications nothing was done by this unit past May 7th 2008. When I sued for defamation Gregozek was back on the case saying things like, " What could I do. You sued her didn't you." as the response to her question, "Why are you doing this. You know that girl(Notaro) is a liar."

This was filed but never entered in the minutes, and Ms. Tawn never mentioned it to me and so I had no idea she filed this. The fact that this is not listed in any docket or minutes or whatever is astounding. The fact that Franica Tawn made no attempt to pursue this or correct the record, is just too incredible to believe

Post a Comment

Stef Willen's Disaster, Literally.

In the history of publishing, there is a fascinating history of memoirs that get pulled from publication, after an eagle eyed reader or rea...