FRISCH FRIVOLOUS LOLSUIT HOBBLES ON...DEFENDANTS COUNTERCLAIM FOR LEGAL FEES
Let's see...when we last left off, three months ago, Miss Debbie's
first draft of her lolsuit had been pwned by an Oregon Federal Court
. Teh Deb was
given two choices: a) cut her losses and give up on a fool's errand or
b) double-down on her stoopidity and persist in teh lolsuit. Guess
which option Miss Debbie chose?
Yup--Teh Deb polished her turd and re-re-resubmitted it.
After throwing out two-thirds of Miss Debbie's claims, and half of
her defendants, a Federal Judge finally pronounced on July 20th
that Teh Deb's lolsuit complaint had passed the knuckledragging
lowest of standards.
By the end of July, papers were served upon 6 defendants: three
police officers (who we'll call D, J and R) and the governments of
Eugene, Lane County and Springfield Oregon.
Last week, the Defendants filed their preliminary "answers" to Miss
Debbie's ranting charges.
Miss Debbie's lolsuit flows from her most recent criminal conviction
after drunkenly assaulting an acquaintance on November 2, 2008.
Here is a list of Dweebie's three main claims--along with the actual
facts, as they have been revealed to Teh Squeak
. (Quotations are
from Miss Debbie's frivolous civil complaint:)1) Allegation:
Miss Debbie "alleges that at 1:15am on November 2,
2008 when defendants [police officers D and J] coerced [Teh Deb]
into relinquishing control of her motor vehicle..., [teh copz] unlawfully
seized [Teh Deb's] motor vehicle, thus violating [Debbie's] fourth
amendment right to be free from unlawful seizure."Translation: After a night's pub crawl, in which Debbie did shots at
a number of bars, she attracted the attention of local police. They
gave the visibly intoxicated Miss Debbie a choice: be arrested for
DUI or allow an acquaintance to drive you home.
Debbie chose the latter--even shaking hands with Officer J, afterward,
thus proving her consent to the deal.2) Allegation:
Miss Debbie "alleges that [Officer W] failed to present
crucial material and other evidence related to his November 26, 2008
Domestic Violence Investigative Report. [Teh Deb] alleges that [Office
W's] failure to...chemically test [Miss Debbie's pepper spray]...[and]
failure to interview [teh Deb] to corroborate teh allegations made by
[teh Deb's assault victim]"Translation:
After Miss Debbie's victim drove Teh Deb home, Debbie
repaid the victim's kindness by attacking, biting, and pepper-spraying
the victim. Officer W recorded these facts (and photos of Debbie's victim's
injuries) in a routine Domestic Violence Report. Miss Debbie is angry that
police actually documented (and held Miss Debbie responsible for) her
criminal actions.3) Allegation:
Teh Deb raves that "On November 9, 2008...,[Debbie]
emailed [teh Lane County District Attorney] a picture of a subset of
the physical injuries [Debbie falsely sez she got from her victim].
[Officer W] chose not to include the photograph of [teh Deb's] physical
injuries in his report [of how Debbie attacked her victim]...[Teh Deb]
alleges that as a result of the failure to include the material evidence
provided to [teh District Attorney], [Officer W] violated [teh Deb's]
Fourteenth Amendment right to due process."Translation: Miss Debbie was so drunk the night of her criminal actions
that she fell on her ass and sustained a leg-bruise
. Teh Deb tried to
pass off her self-inflicted bruise as inflicted by her victim. Debbie is
angry that police ignored Teh Deb's transparent and feebleminded lies.
Unsurprisingly, the defendants in Miss Debbie's frivolous lolsuit aren't
taking Frisch's lies lying down. In their answers filed in court, Defendants
vowed to make Teh Deb pay for her abuse of legal process: "Defendants
[D, J, and R] are entitled to recover their reasonable attorney's
fees as costs under 42 USC 1988 because [Teh Deb's] allegations
against them are frivolous and wholly without merit." Translation:
Miss Debbie's laughable attempt to play lawbaw may turn
out to be an expensive fool's errand, indeed.