But even with right being on his side, a good lawyer and a good hearing officer, Pakter won for political reasons. His constant barrage of publicity that keeps the DOE in front of the public eye and embarrassed. The Post got information (tainted) from somewhere to try to smear Pakter. Could it have been the DOE who leaked scurrilous info? Today it continues.
For Immediate Release
The Clash of the Titans
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
The Supreme Court
80 Centre Street
Court Room 328
9:30 A.M. Sharp
David Pakter
versus
NEW YORK POST & NYC Dept of Education
The NY POST & DOE may bring 12 lawyers
David Pakter will need ONLY one.
The Legendary New York Lawyer
Roger Bennet Adler, Esq.
Background information:
On Sunday, March 21, 2010
the NEW YORK POST
Published the untrue statement that David Pakter,
a former "Teacher of the Year"
was removed from his position for "sexual misconduct"
On Wednesday, June 16 the NY POST & the DOE
will have to appear before
The Honorable Justice Cynthia Kern
the NEW YORK POST
Published the untrue statement that David Pakter,
a former "Teacher of the Year"
was removed from his position for "sexual misconduct"
On Wednesday, June 16 the NY POST & the DOE
will have to appear before
The Honorable Justice Cynthia Kern
to explain this despicable Libel.
Be a Witness to history.
Brooklyn Bridge Train Station
David, I admire your courage! Keep going and put these liars in their places.
ReplyDeleteDear David.Congratulations for winning your case!!! I hope that you will do it again in the coming trials.
ReplyDeleteCongratulations for winning your case! Could you let us know when there will be more hearings of your next case in time to come. Thanks!
ReplyDeleteDavid,
ReplyDeleteAfter having also been a victim of retaliation while a Chapter Leader - excessed after 22 years, Rubber room 3 1/2 weeks - I congratulate you on your courage and perserverance. If if ashamed that, like myself, the UFT turned their backs and had to spend money to protect myself. You should know how much your victory and the victory to come means to those like myself.
Oh, how I wish I could have had a fair hearing, but in Nevada, there is no such thing. The "due process" hearings are jokes, and the "unions" are in complete cahoots with the school districts.
ReplyDeleteMany Thanks to all those people who have supported my cause, the cause of ALL Teachers, for the past five years.
ReplyDelete_________________________________
Now the Legal action moves from 49 Chambers Street, Joel Klein's scruffy "turf", controled by his stooge DOE attorneys and Legal "hitmen", to a REAL Court where the "Rule of Law" applies and DOE stooge Witnesses end up with a one way ticket to several years in the "slammer" when they commit Perjury.
________________________________
Future Schedule for David Pakter
in New York State Supreme Court
The Hon. Supreme Court Justice, Cynthia Kern, presiding
_________________________________
David Pakter
versus
NEW YORK POST & NYC Dept of Education
The Legendary New York Lawyer
Roger Bennet Adler, Esq. appearing for David Pakter
__________________________________
Next Court Hearing will be:
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
The New York State Supreme Court
80 Centre Street
Court Room 328
9:30 A.M. Sharp
_________________________________
Lexington Ave train to Brooklyn Bridge
_________________________________
Hang this Notice on your Refrigerator
Watch one of New York City's
most famous Attorneys and respected Litigators face off with the NEW YORK POST newspaper and Faux Chancellor Joel Klein. Esq.'s New York City Dept of Education
_________________________________
Anonymous free discourse is a grand right & must be defended at all costs. Sadly, such as it is, this great right is subject to ill-use. The public's advantage through "freedom of speech" is clearly reasonable, more than ever in an example necessitating clear public awareness , for example thugs and abusers. However the price must not be borne by a spotless party or organization.
ReplyDeleteAnd yet, fabricated allegations and libelous attacks are many times made by masked miscreants. Time and again these anonymous cyber-bullies have some category of antisocial (identified as psychopaths in past times) or similar Axis II Mental Disorder, and are obsessed only through hate and revengeful, psychotic drive. Hurting or controlling others brings them strange satisfaction; they're actually fueled by the anguish they cause; a victim's futile efforts to disengage is their sick trophy. Healthy people like 90-97% of the individuals reading this column are unable begin to understand what makes these individuals tick. Stop for a moment, attempt to imagine having no conscience; it is simply unimaginable.
This lamentable social quandary has grown in the preceding 10 years and manifested itself primarily through anonymous online defamation. There have been cases where courts issued orders insisting that anonymous blogspot.com users can be uncloaked for all to see, such orders are time and again a cause of offense to a small but boisterous collection of rabid people that assume that freedom of expression must be absolute and unconditional & that the speaker can not be stood to account for his or her speech, without consideration to the accuracy or deceptiveness of the utterances. Many presume that if these same vocal groups were to witness the devastating effects that a concerted internet smear campaign can have on the physical, vocational, emotional, & social health of targets or their family; they would not be as loud in their protests.
Envisage a grazier who has had all of his or her stock killed, barns and fields burned-over by a vandal; the withering impact on his or her living does not take Einstein understand. Whereas, a white-collar worker, artist, physician, builder, or executive who depends on his/her character to get new customers, and maintain current clients, will be as totally ruined as the farmer described above as the end product of a persuasive , targeted cyber vilification assault. The exception being that the community, law enforcement, the courts and juries can better understand the extent of the farmer’s anguish.
An underlying aspect of anonymous online e-slander is that it has less credibility if seriously considered by sharp and objective individuals. Nevertheless, there is a new dynamic with the dilemma of vicious & anonymous bloggers. Although vitriol could be clearly unfounded, if the victim is being "Googled" for employment, contract awards, Boy Scout leadership or a prom partner, the individual conducting the due diligence needs to look at the likely PR risks from attaching to the target. Whilst the potential employer might see beyond the denunciation, the decision maker needs to wonder about what their customers and partners will imagine if less sophisticated or open-minded.