Why would First Fidelity feel compelled to even reply here, let alone admit to calling “JK” who they have determined to be deranged…in an attempt to help?
Doesn’t make any sense to me.
Anyway...
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> The facts of the situation are:
1. Our casino is completely fair. In blackjack we use 1 deck, and it is randomly shuffled after each hand. I will submit this software for ANYONE who wants to test it.
In fact, I WILL OFFER A $10,000 REWARD TO ANYONE WHO CAN ESTABLISH THAT IT IS ANYTHING OTHER THAN A RANDOM SHUFFLE.
I have 15000 active customers, wouldn't someone else have noticed this by now?
I believe this settles the basis for JK's rant.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
"Our casino is completely fair…etc., etc." Objection your Honor…these comments are “completely” unsubstantiated. Why all of a sudden the “rewards” and software testing offer? What would such “prove” anyway since the actual games played by the plaintiff at the time of the incident cannot be assured against tampering? Sustained.
Prosecution would also like to submit at this moment such testimony by the Defendant as evidence of FRAUD. In that, advertising a game as a “single-deck” which shuffles the card following "each" played hand misleads the player into believing that the mathematical principles and probabilities of a single-deck are in affect. Please submit such evidence as plaintiff’s exhibit A.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
2. This is a customer who recently pulled a similar scam at Heritage where "I didn't make the plays, someone else must have" was the best he could come up with in trying to shake them down for thousands. Heritage traced the IP to same computer, and he gave up the scam.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Objection your honor…more unsubstantiated, defensive comments, meant to divert one’s focus of addressing the plaintiff’s issues, posing nothing more then an attempted attack upon the plaintiff’s character. Sustained.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
3.After the 400th or so call, JK was told that if he had been serious about a lawsuit, his 400+ phone calls and psychotic behavior would probably ruin his chances. We recommended he get immediate attention, (and I, personally, worried that he was going to jump out a window while I was talking to him) and we called his house, informing the person who answered about his behavior and advising they get him help.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
How many advertising calls does First Fidelity make in an hour, day, week, month, or year? Prosecution finds humor in First Fidelity attempting to associate 400 calls with “psychotic” behavior…
The Shrink is called to the witness stand as an expert in this field. Let’s get this straight…if I want to help a deranged individual, I simply call their home and advice whoever answers to assist? This shit should be on Comedy Central.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
I would like to here these tapes of people, "even small children" being threatened, as I was here for the entire scene, and can truthfully state that NOTHING OF THE SORT OCCURRED.
This is simply a disgruntled sore loser, who maxed out his credit cards playing blackjack and is going to extremes to blackmail money. I have no need to threaten anyone. If JK has anything of value (I doubt it), it will be obtained in a libel suit.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No need to hear “threatening tapes” when libel suits are being served-up here…now is there?
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
I strongly reccommmend that all other books check for this serial scammer. Contact me using your book's URL and I will forward you the information. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Comforting thought knowing First Fidelity solicits personal information to others upon public forums…after all, is not First Fidelity the “gurus” of solicitation or is this just a new technique they are trying here?
Not sure it will work here First Fidelity, thinking it’s got to be a “hard sell” offering up such things as helpful phone calls to the deranged, rigged card games and libel suits.
I wonder, do libel suits and Rx postings cure the deranged as effectively as phone calls?
Perhaps another call to THE SHRINK?
Doesn’t make any sense to me.
Anyway...
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> The facts of the situation are:
1. Our casino is completely fair. In blackjack we use 1 deck, and it is randomly shuffled after each hand. I will submit this software for ANYONE who wants to test it.
In fact, I WILL OFFER A $10,000 REWARD TO ANYONE WHO CAN ESTABLISH THAT IT IS ANYTHING OTHER THAN A RANDOM SHUFFLE.
I have 15000 active customers, wouldn't someone else have noticed this by now?
I believe this settles the basis for JK's rant.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
"Our casino is completely fair…etc., etc." Objection your Honor…these comments are “completely” unsubstantiated. Why all of a sudden the “rewards” and software testing offer? What would such “prove” anyway since the actual games played by the plaintiff at the time of the incident cannot be assured against tampering? Sustained.
Prosecution would also like to submit at this moment such testimony by the Defendant as evidence of FRAUD. In that, advertising a game as a “single-deck” which shuffles the card following "each" played hand misleads the player into believing that the mathematical principles and probabilities of a single-deck are in affect. Please submit such evidence as plaintiff’s exhibit A.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
2. This is a customer who recently pulled a similar scam at Heritage where "I didn't make the plays, someone else must have" was the best he could come up with in trying to shake them down for thousands. Heritage traced the IP to same computer, and he gave up the scam.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Objection your honor…more unsubstantiated, defensive comments, meant to divert one’s focus of addressing the plaintiff’s issues, posing nothing more then an attempted attack upon the plaintiff’s character. Sustained.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
3.After the 400th or so call, JK was told that if he had been serious about a lawsuit, his 400+ phone calls and psychotic behavior would probably ruin his chances. We recommended he get immediate attention, (and I, personally, worried that he was going to jump out a window while I was talking to him) and we called his house, informing the person who answered about his behavior and advising they get him help.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
How many advertising calls does First Fidelity make in an hour, day, week, month, or year? Prosecution finds humor in First Fidelity attempting to associate 400 calls with “psychotic” behavior…
The Shrink is called to the witness stand as an expert in this field. Let’s get this straight…if I want to help a deranged individual, I simply call their home and advice whoever answers to assist? This shit should be on Comedy Central.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
I would like to here these tapes of people, "even small children" being threatened, as I was here for the entire scene, and can truthfully state that NOTHING OF THE SORT OCCURRED.
This is simply a disgruntled sore loser, who maxed out his credit cards playing blackjack and is going to extremes to blackmail money. I have no need to threaten anyone. If JK has anything of value (I doubt it), it will be obtained in a libel suit.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No need to hear “threatening tapes” when libel suits are being served-up here…now is there?
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
I strongly reccommmend that all other books check for this serial scammer. Contact me using your book's URL and I will forward you the information. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Comforting thought knowing First Fidelity solicits personal information to others upon public forums…after all, is not First Fidelity the “gurus” of solicitation or is this just a new technique they are trying here?
Not sure it will work here First Fidelity, thinking it’s got to be a “hard sell” offering up such things as helpful phone calls to the deranged, rigged card games and libel suits.
I wonder, do libel suits and Rx postings cure the deranged as effectively as phone calls?
Perhaps another call to THE SHRINK?