The current EFF website asks that persons wanting legal representation use info@EFF.org to so request.Previously, persons were given the name of a coordinator to contact. I did bring a written request to their physical office months ago and was told in person that my request was denied. I do not recall that there was any written denial.
Now,I have sent a request to info@EFF.org and received by return email a denial.EFF currently also states they may send info on cases to a list of Cooperating attorneys who are passionate about the same issues as the EFF. That does not appear to be the case with my request. Hmmm,individual sues government and insurance corporations then undergoes obstructions to basic constitutional rights and her safety is threatened. You pay the bills for other physicians failures to speak up about the corruption in healthcare today and you lose here!
The second attempt to ask for representation secondary to the failure of a major legal organization to even receive electronic communications,sent to EFF.org,is not even answered. Perhaps the EFF has not been the entity receiving and replying to my requests?Perhaps,like Ted Nace noted for the ACLU’s behavior, in his book Gangs of America, that the ACLU appears to take cases that further the rights of corporate entities, the EFF has begun to do so also? If you contribute to the EFF,perhaps you can have them offer to post all requests on line, unless the requesting persons refuses, so that the types of cases they are refusing is clear.
Date: Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 3:59 PM
Subject: Re: [#TL-L6735] request for representation: Cynthia Jeanne Lee MD
Thanks for contacting EFF. I’m sorry, but due to our limited resources we’re unable to provide representation in this matter or offer detailed legal analysis. I recommend you visit your local bar association: they usually provide low cost consultations at a very reasonable price.
I hope this information helps.
Legal Intake Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Become a Member! https://www.eff.org/support
On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, email@example.com wrote:
> April 30, 2013
> Dear Attorneys at EFF.org,
> I am making a request for legal representation due to interference with my
> access to governmental services, attorney representation and record
> keeping for legal reasons. The scenerio includes having the interference
> begin while in legal proceedings with a state government and with
> insurance carriers. I have reason to believe that under the color of law,
> false accusations were made in order to arrange surveillance in order to
> interrupt the above mentioned legal processes.
> Among the many occurrences consistent with this surveillance are these
> three events that occurred in California. I purchased a prepaid phone. I
> registered it under an assumed name via the computers at the Long Haul
> infoshop in Berkeley. Later that day, I was in my vehicle at the state
> park above Oakland when a helicopter flew rather low overhead, my prepaid
> phone began beeping, and I found that 2 minutes of my talk time had
> disappeared. Since I bought this phone in order to attempt to make
> unobstructed calls to attorneys, this event prevented this access.
> A second event occurred when I made contact via fax with an attorney in
> Alaska. His office called back and his staff was unable to hear my end of
> the conversation. I realized too late that my phone’s mute button had
> turned on without any assistance from me. Pondering this issue, I waited
> two days then called an acquaintance in the peninsula. We spoke for two
> hours and he had no difficulty with hearing me at all. The mute light
> remained on nevertheless.
> A third event occurred when I called a friend in Texas by first contacting
> his family to let him know I needed to speak with him. He called back but
> the call immediately went to voicemail despite my answering timely. When I
> immediately called to check the voicemail for his contact info, I had to
> listen several times. Each time, the info became increasingly difficult to
> hear and was finally so garbled as to be unrecognizable as human speech.
> This is not the only time this has happened, leaving me with the question
> of whether the government can access the telephone company’s computers and
> erase information?
> My case is loaded with multiple constitutional questions including whether
> , under color of law, the government will intervene to assist one party in
> a legal dispute. My dispute with the government regarded the issue of
> experts not qualified under the Americans with Disabilities Act to advise
> the court while restricting my right to have a qualified expert address
> the court when I had an encephalopathy and hearing impairments.
> Thank you for your time and consideration.
> Cynthia Jeanne Lee MD
Now, I contact them to verify their policy of acknowledging requests and present the response here and also the 2011 request.
Problem: I asked for help at a tech center and a volunteer helped place all this info on the blog. Then, she said she needed to clean it up a little and much of it disappeared. Tech center closed before this could be figured out. I am looking for a person experienced at wordpress to help me out. I did send on to the EFF a statement that the Southern Poverty Law Center had no record of receiving any requests from me. The EFF failed to acknowledge this subsequent request for representation.
Date: Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 9:49 AM
From: cynthia lee <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cynthia Jeanne Lee MD
C/o 3rd Floor SWC
150 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102
Morris Seligman Dees
Southern Poverty Law Center
400 Washington Avenue
Montgomery, Alabama 36104
September 28, 2013
Via Fax from 415-440-7773 to 334-956-8491
Dear Mr. Dees,
I write to you directly because two prior requests for representation have gone unanswered and conceivably were not received. The legal situation I
am asking the Center to accept for representation includes federal and corporate collusion to prevent access to the courts and will unmask the collaboration between the insurance and pharmaceutical interests to keep forensic experts from being exposed as scientifically incompetent to render decisions on human behavior. The first assertion is that corporate collusion with the Federal government is preventing access to the courts can be explored while representing me. I was deliberately set up by a politically influential attorney who was representing me in a civil matter with insurance defense experts in order to keep certain information out of the public domain. These attorneys conspired to throw my cases. The cases included an Americans with Disabilities Act complaint intended to protect the ADA right to accommodation for competent experienced experts to advise the courts. The other cases involved insurance coverage for disability. These cases would have brought information on massive misdiagnosing by physicians, even affecting other physicians, into the public arena. This is a crucial concept in the criminal justice system because the etiology of human behavior is affected by toxic exposures currently not being considered because of obstruction to clinician education that is benefiting numerous politically influential industries. Finally there was collusion with the Department of Justice to attack my medical license and place me under surveillance by manufacturing an insurance fraud scam and a suspicious Muslim event at my medical practice. This final action was engineered utilizing pharmaceutical industry associated personnel and protected their financial interests in squelching my ability to pursue free speech in my home state of Texas.
My experiences in attempting to retain unbiased attorney representation for the stalking and other criminal behaviors involved in the stalking have convinced me of the need for an investigation into the insurance industry deliberately setting up plaintiff law firms to gather information for them, manipulate public perception, control access to cases (perhaps flood the market obstructing access to non-controlled firms, an antitrust issue), throw many cases. I believe this is being done in collusion with the U S DOJ, perhaps as a result of the Bush administration influences. For example, I have retained attorneys in Oregon, while having to relocate frequently because of the stalking, only to subsequently discover significant government related conflicts of interest. This includes one attorney, advertising as a private practitioner, claiming to have the contract for the ACLU, actually being a long term city municipal judge part time. I have many such experiences that can be explored for the issue of obstruction of access to the justice system.
Ursula Steck MSW is witnessing my attempts to obtain attorney representation. I have a weekly appointment with her. Her office phone number is 415-592-2788. It is my only phone contact number. Her fax number is 415-440-7770. Please document my two prior attempts to contact the SPLC for representation.
Cynthia Jeanne Lee MD
I hope Mr. Glazer has a successful career in constitutional law. He advertizes that he does constitutional law. I’ve had some interesting results in trying to contact attorneys, with correspondence disappearing, arriving on plain paper and not on stationary, etc. that I have decided to document all the firms that I have attempted to ask for consideration of representation. Perhaps if the fact these firms have decided to step out of the way on a case involving criminal harassment for filing a first amendment protected suit against a local government, it will give you a heads up. I expect individuals or even larger firms to plead that they just don’t have enough time to look into this….what if your family physician, when you present with a headache suspicious for an impending aneursym, decides you are just too much trouble to worry about? I’ve been in that situation, I’ve worn those shoes. I expect attorneys to start standing up for us or else shut up and at least pay their taxes.
Mr. Glazner declined representation per these email exchanges.
I sought out Mr. Griffin for representation due to his familiarity with the Patriot Act and the fact it can be used for commercial spying on Americans and not to their benefit. I have good reasons for believing that National Security Letters and other means were used to gather information about me from usually protected sources (because of a conversation I had with an executive secretary at the Travis County Medical Society). Also, if one does not have the right to know that records were obtained, one cannot review these records for accuracy. Why would I seek out an attorney with Patriot Act experience? At my medical office in Austin Texas, a man presented as a patient and represented himself as single, Muslim and Pakistani. Since I had experience with female patients identifying as Muslim (and accompanied by their spouse), I had come to understand that it was unlikely a Muslim male would seek out a female physician. After 9/11, this same man came into my office, behaved belligerently (upsetting my front office staff who came to get me immediately) and he demanded I complete and sign forms attesting to his identity for the purposes of going out of the country. I certainly cannot know if my office staff alerted law enforcement but I would not have been surprised if she had, all things considered. The phone call with the man purporting to be Mr. Griffin was strange (as documented in the fax document scanned and linked below) and I do not believe that was Mr. Griffin on the telephone with me. To that end, how hard is it for the Feds to have some woman call, identify herself as me, then be abusive or inappropriate? The use of identity doubles is a very old game.
My fax to his office (click below) to alert him as to the situation. I have never heard back. Sept 22, 2011. This is not the first time I have tried to alert him that someone with a different speaking voice was using his identity on a telephone call to this prospective client. I eventually heard him interviewed on NPR and it was clearly not the same person’s voice.
Odd, why would this firm have a potential conflict of interest in regards to a pharmaceutical company?
Why would this reply state that the statute of limitations may be as short as 3 years but their submission form state that the statute of limitations may be as short as 6 years?
Hmmm, maybe it is like the Madoff scandal where despite years of complaints, the persons who lost money were limited to only going back 7 years for redress? While the SEC sat on its thumb, destroyed records, etc.?
I called this firm some months ago and asked if a physician whistleblower could walk in to give information and was told that was not possible. If that is truly this firm’s policy, well, whistleblowers, keep that in mind. If it is not their policy, would their employee say this on the telephone? Note how EVERYONE OF THESE LAW FIRMS expect us to use Federally controlled and easily monitored forms of communication.
we either have viable and accessible courts of law or we have anarchy in the streets.
Friday October 7, 2011 Earlier this week I received an unsigned email from Matt Smith at Phillips and Cohen turning down representation. They pled poverty. Yep, that’s right! A huge qui tam firm with billions in settlements has plead to having too scarce resources to consider this case. nO u s mail received. Expect a copy of the notice here soon. If it disappears before I do that, I start the process of documenting again! Screww Em!
Meanwhile, I am going to OccupyWall Street events, handing out my little notices that I am crowd sourcing finding an attorney. Conceivably, any federal agent or contractor that messes with this activity would be at risk of obstructing access to justice or obstructing an investigation of the illegal collusion between the FBI, the insurance industry, and the pharmaceutical industry as well as any other un-named alphabet agencies. Keep in mind the NPR interview with Dan Priest of the New York Times. She revealed that there are hundreds of federal agencies now capable of surveiling Americans and even more contracted firms and an unknown number of sub-contractors all surveiling us. (what is the correct spelling of servailing? the spell check program is not highlighting it but I know it probably isn’t correct.)
My request for representation to Loren Jacobson faxed September 13, 2011 has been answered via U S mail. The document received appears to be a copy of a letter on their letterhead signed by Charles Siegel dated September 14, 2011. It notes that it is also being sent Via CM-RRR. no.7010 0780 0001 4705 7481. I await this certified mail copy which must be the original. This firm probably got burned badly when the Ritalin class action suits were dismissed. Hmmm, doesn t it seem like my case would be useful in demonstrating to the court the folly in dismissing the case when the vested powers have imply devised ways to shut the opposing views out by criminal means? Does anyone know of an evaluation of the judges reasoning for dismissing the class actions available on line?loren jacobson. walter kraus iI
walter kraus>REPLY siegel f the judge’s reasoning for dismissing the suits available on line?
As of Sept 23, 2011 still no certified mail receipt available for me to pick up the original of the rejection letter. Does it take 7 days?
Pamela Price’s staff responded by sending me an involved form to fill out and return. I am pending doing this.
This is actually the second time I have approached her firm. The first time was about 3 years ago. When I entered her office, where she shares a waiting room with a consulting firm, it was clear that her receptionist was not at her desk. The chair back had a dainty fine quality woman’s sweater, size small or medium, on it. There was a large Anglo adult male sitting there. I left a request that I filled out there. When I returned later that day, a tall black female with dreads was sitting at the desk. I asked her if she was Pamela Price and she denied this. I was told that the reque4st was denied. I asked if that was in writing and she looked through some outgoing mail and said no. Somehow, I do not think the persons that I met at Ms. Price’s reception desk truly represented the way her law practice is run. So I am posting this in both categories of refused and no response at the current time.
kenneth n. FruchtRight there in the San Francisco telephone book is an ad for Kenneth N. Frucht. He wants civil rights cases. So, July 18th, 2011 I faxed a request to his office fax, 415-392-7973. I requested a reply by mail. Days go by without a response. On August 16, 2011 I called his office to be certain he had received the fax. I was transferred to a man who said he was Kenneth Frucht. He said he had not seen my request. He expressed to not have any concern that he had not seen my request. I explained that this issue was stalking/retaliation for suing the government/insurance companies and asking for an investigation by the FBI. He declined the case and declined to send me that in writing.
Does this sound like the type of professional you want to take your civil rights case? If he didn’t receive the request and doesn’t care that he didn’t? If, in fact, that was not Mr. Frucht on the phone, this posting gives him an opportunity to rebut my statement and initiate an investigation into who would steal his identity.
After my experiences with the ACLU and many different attorneys who advertise that they are there to protect your constitutional/civil rights, I believe that the Bar associations have failed us. The public needs a website where we can show the types of cases that are going without legal representation. It is really no wonder that this is happening. See my blog on the experiences at the Golden Gate school of Law.
Like many progressive Americans, I thought the ACLU would be there for me/us when the government tramps all over one’s First Amendment rights. Well, think again. They have sold out to the corporations. Keeping in mind the significant hold over our communications, from the telephone to the internet to the post office that the Patriot Act accomplishes, wouldn’t you think that the ACLU would set up some system to be sure that their mail, calls, or email, if intercepted, could be verified? NOT
After realizing, around 2002, that my U S Mail regarding the Federal ADA case, could go astray so that I had to resort to frequent trips to the Federal Courthouse to even find out what had been filed (without notifying me), I eventually realized that, perhaps, my correspondence to the Texas ACLU hadn’t been received. Perhaps, it was. However, I received a negative response.
After my medical records at Stanford in Palo Alto had been altered/corrupted to remove information about the missed diagnosis, I decided in December 2004 to approach the ACLU of Northern California in San Francisco. Mean time, I had discovered in a 2004 AMA handbook about the Federal laws regarding privacy of your medical records and access to your medical records that the Bush administration was now asserting that the Feds had a right to keep information about licensed professional persons in the medical records while forbidding the physician/clinician from allowing you (the patient) to see this information and while the Feds also maintained the right (without your permission) to share this info with licensing boards, law enforcement, and others of their own choosing. Surely, any attorney making a living filing or defending malpractice claims must know about this? Shit! So, I approached the ACLU for representation. I hand carried a request to their old Mission Street office (before they migrated to their high dollar expensive White Shoe digs near the Embarcadero. I was told to expect an answer in two weeks or less. No answer. I had a meeting about the issue with John F. Campbell, Austin attorney who had represented me. When I told him that I requested representation from the ACLU, he laughed and stated ‘they won’t receive it’. I replied that I had caught on to the obstruction to communications by phone and mail, so I hand delivered it to the ACLU in San Francisco. He repeated his prior statement. ‘ Doesn’t matter, they won’t receive it.’
So, I scheduled a trip. The day I was taking off from Austin, an answer arrived…approximately 3 weeks from submission. No interest from the ACLU per the letter. I corresponded again from Texas. A letter arrived purportedly from the ACLU of Northern California that stated they would return my records, if asked. I took them up on this and received copious records regarding an individual in another state, of a totally different name, regarding her treatments for hallucinations mailed to my home address. Anyway, after making more attempts to deliver requests, in person, or by certified, then finally registered mail, I walked in and asked to see the supervisor. I had copies or originals of all documents and the same individual purportedly had signed all the ACLU refusals but his signature was completely different on each document. The office staff said sure. Then a few minutes later, they received a phone call and subsequently told me to leave or they would call the police. I’ve never done civil disobedience before this and decided I would call their bluff. Police do arrive and I am sitting on the floor of their copy room refusing to leave. I’m threatened with being hauled out in a strait jacket. My possessions are picked up and moved without my permission. I’m ticketed and released. The ticket is stolen and as best I know never surfaced again.
The bottom line….the ACLU uses volunteer attorneys from the community to screen their requests for representation. How hard is it for an attorney to replace a request for representation with a fictitious one? If an employed attorney did it, it would then be more traceable. Does the ACLU use sloppy procedure on purpose? Surely they must have a clue? With all the money the public donated, the ACLU could afford high dollar digs down town (near the Federal Reserve!) but not be able to afford a means of protecting yours or anyone’s requests for representations. I attended an outreach session by the ACLU representative, also an attorney, so I complained about the obstruction, receiving records obviously not regarding me, etc. Instead of personally stating he would investigate, I was told just to keep submitting.
It was in a book by Ted Nace that I first saw a statement that the ACLU actions appeared to be protecting corporations over individuals.
The certified mail receipt? It was signed FELON, I kid you not.
Here is the result of the latest effort to have the ACLU of Northern California acknowledge my submission/request for representation: note the absence of a written or signed name. This is unlike the prior efforts where a form letter had a person’s name type written then a signature. It is just that the signature varied widely from document to document, never the same twice.