Former paralegal in deposition: Florida foreclosure firm regularly forged document signatures

[seafan]

(edited for copyright purposes proud patriot Moderator Democratic Underground)

The clock strikes midnight in Florida.


Ex-employee says foreclosure firm forged signatures

By Kimberly Miller
Palm Beach Post

October 8, 2010

A former paralegal for Florida foreclosure giant David J. Stern describes an office where signatures on notarized documents were regularly forged, legal papers were prepared en masse in Guam and the Philippines, and closed-door screaming matches erupted when files weren't moved fast enough.

The accusations were made in a sworn statement taken Sept. 22 by the Florida Attorney General's Office for its investigation of the Plantation-based law firm, and appear to support nationwide concerns about behind-the-scenes practices used to take people's homes.

Paralegal Tammie Lou Kapusta, who said she was fired by the firm in July 2009 after refusing to falsify documents, recalls Stern's business growing from 200 employees to 1,100 in a little more than a year's time as foreclosures skyrocketed and staff struggled to keep up.
Notary stamps, Kapusta said, were readily available in the office and employees, including herself, who were not notaries, routinely stamped documents.

People who could best fake the signature of the person designated to verify foreclosure affidavits would be sought out to sign her name. Firm executives knew about the practice, Kapusta said.
Also, assignments of mortgage were sometimes made after a foreclosure judgment was entered, a sign that the wrong bank brought the action, she said.

Stern's firm, which is one of four large companies in the state representing banks in foreclosures, handles thousands of cases in Palm Beach County.

Stern attorney Jeffrey Tew, of the Miami-based Tew Cardenas law firm, said Friday that Kapusta is a disgruntled former employee with a vendetta against the company. None of her accusations of wrongdoing is true, said Tew, who noted that he was not invited to attend the testimony and was unable to ask rebuttal questions.

"When you read it, you can see her bias," Tew said about the statement.

.....

DEPOSITION OF TAMMIE LOU KAPUSTA


(Partial transcript follows)

12:11 p.m. – 1:58 p.m.
September 22, 2010
17 Office of the Attorney General
110 Southeast 6th Street, 10th Floor
18 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301



1 P R O C E E D I N G S
2 – - -
3 Deposition taken before Kalandra Smith, Court
4 Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of
5 Florida at Large, in the above cause.
6 – - -
7 THEREUPON:
8 TAMMIE LOU KAPUSTA
9 having been first duly sworn or affirmed, was examined
10 and testified as follows:



1 Q Let’s go to the assignments of mortgage. They
2 were prepared in-house?
3 A Yeah.
4 Q You’re smiling. You want to tell me about
5 them?
6 A Assignments were done sometimes after the
7 final judgement was entered.
8 Q Do you know why that is?
9 A Because that’s what we were directed to do



19 Q Can you tell me the execution of the
20 assignments, how it worked?
21 A Assignments were prepared again from the
22 casesum. All of our stuff comes from the casesum. They
23 would be stamped and signed by a notary or not. Per
24 floor we had a designated spot to place them and Cheryl
25 would come once a day and sign them.
22
1 Q Sign them as what?
2 A As –
3 Q For the bank?
4 A Correct.
5 Q Or for MERS or whoever it was for?
6 A Correct.
7 Q Would these notaries be there watching her as
8 she signed?
9 A No.
10 Q She would just sit there and sign stacks of
11 them?
12 A Correct. As far as notaries go in the firm I
13 don’t think any notary actually used their own notary
14 stamp. The team used them.
15 Q There were just stamps around?
16 A Yes.
17 Q And you actually saw that?
18 A I was part of that.
19 Q You did it? Are you a notary?
20 A No, I’m not.
21 Q Did you sign as a witness?
22 A I did not. I signed as a witness on one
23 document and after that I decided that I didn’t want to
24 put my name as a witness anymore.
25 Q Tell me about the stamps. You stamped them?
23
1 A Yeah, I had stamps. Each team had a notary on
2 them or notaries that I was aware of. Whether they were
3 or weren’t wasn’t –
4 Q You had stamps?
5 A Correct. We would stamp them and they would
6 get signed.
7 Q Stamp them in blanks?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Who would sign them?
10 A Other people on the team that could sign the
11 signature of the person or just a check on there or
12 whatever.
13 Q Was that common practice?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Was that standard practice?
16 A Pretty much.
17 Q What about the witnesses?
18 A Those would be signed by juniors who were –
19 Q Standing there?
20 A Here, sign this. It has to go to Cheryl, sign
21 it. Then it would go and sit at the desk where Cheryl
22 would sign everything.
23 Q Out of view of the notary and out of view of
24 the witnesses?
25 A Correct.
24
1 Q Do you know who implemented this procedure?
2 A Cheryl.
3 Q Cheryl did?
4 A Um-hum.
5 Q Did anybody else sign with the firm for the
6 banks?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Who was that?
9 A There were people that were responsible for
10 signing Cheryl’s name. Cheryl, Tammie Sweat, and Beth
11 Cerni. Those were the only three people that could sign
12 Cheryl’s name. If you ever look at assignments you’ll
13 see that they are not all the same.
14 MS. EDWARDS: What are the names again?
15 Cheryl, Tammie?
16 THE WITNESS: Tammie Sweat and Beth Cerni.
17 MS. EDWARDS: Could you spell that.
18 MS. CLARKSON: C-E-R-N-I.
19 BY MS. CLARKSON:
20 Q Did they practice Cheryl’s signature?
21 A I would assume so.
22 Q Did you ever see them?
23 A Not practicing but I’ve seen them sign it.
24 Q Did you see somebody sign Cheryl’s name?
25 A Yes.
25
1 Q That wasn’t Cheryl?
2 A Yes. All the time.
3 Q Did Cheryl know about this?
4 A Yes.
5 Q Was it at her direction?
6 A Yes.



16 Q Did anyone quit as far as you know due to the
17 practices?
18 A I’m sure but they wouldn’t come right out and
19 say I quit because of the practices. I know that people
20 had left because they were uncomfortable with the things
21 that they were being asked to do, as most of us were.
22 When it got really sticky there were a lot of us that
23 weren’t here.
24 Q What does really sticky mean?
25 A They wanted us to start changing the documents
33
1 and stuff and doing stuff that we weren’t supposed to be
2 doing as far as service.
3 Q What documents did they want you to change?
4 A Manpower documents. A lot of judges started
5 requiring, because of the Jane and John Doe issues,
6 required that you have a military search for all the
7 defendants. If you named a Jane and John Doe as an NKA
8 you had to pull a military search on them. Unless you
9 have somebody’s social security number technically you
10 can’t pull a military search supposedly.
11 The program that we used for the program that
12 we used, you could put in the main defendant’s social
13 security and John or Jane Doe’s name and it would give
14 us a military search saying that they were in the
15 military.
16 Q You would get their social security number
17 because the bank documents contained it?
18 A Correct. The lenders, the referrals had the
19 socials.
20 Q Did you put the social in on everybody to find
21 out their address for service?
22 A Not everybody. I personally did not do it
23 because I refused to do it. I wasn’t going to falsify a
24 military document. I was told that that’s fine,
25 somebody else on your team will do it.
1 Q What do you mean falsify a military document?
2 A Well, I’m using the main defendant’s social
3 security number on somebody else’s name, not his name.
4 John Doe and the main defendant was James, I was taking
5 James’ social security number and putting John Doe’s
6 name in there. I wasn’t but that’s what the practice
7 was. The judges started saying we’re not going to
8 consider service completed until –
9 Q There’s a miliary search?
10 A Correct.
11 Q So why wouldn’t they use the right social
12 security number for the right person?
13 A Because you don’t have a social for an NKA or
14 unknown tenant. They wouldn’t enter a final judgement
15 unless the military doc was there.
16 Q So you just used anybody’s?
17 A Correct.

9 A So what we had to do from that point, again
10 the affidavits were still split in two pages, at that
11 point we were supposed to be sending them back to the
12 banks to be signed now. The problem being that a lot of
13 times we wouldn’t get them back or executed in time for
14 the hearings. So we had what they called signature
15 pages that Tammie Sweat or someone else would have in
16 their possession. If we couldn’t get it back from the
17 bank executed in time we would just take a signature
18 page and put it on the affidavit.
19 Q What was on the signature page?
20 A The signature and notary from the bank.
21 Q Were these documents photocopied or were they
22 original documents?
23 A Some were photocopied.
24 Q How would you get that many from a bank
25 original? The bank supplied them to you.
42
1 A Well, what would happen would be like if I had
2 file A and that one didn’t go to hearing because there
3 was something wrong with it and file B was going to
4 hearing but it was the same bank, I would take the
5 signature page from A and give it to B.
6 Q Oh give it to another file?
7 A And just re-execute this file.
8 Q Okay. That was common practice?
9 A Yes, after Cheryl couldn’t sign.
10 Q Did Cheryl know?
11 A Yes.
12 Q Cheryl knew about all the practices because
13 she is the one who ran the office?
14 A She was the one who implemented them.
15 Q Were there any other activities or practices
16 over at David Stern’s firm that made you feel
17 uncomfortable or that you were unwilling to do?
18 A I don’t know how to answer that question.
19 It’s a loaded one.
20 Q Take your time.
21 A Yeah. Some of the things that were done there
22 just were not on the up and up.
23 Q Explain to me in as much detail as you can
24 what those things were.
25 A I don’t even know where to start with it.

.....

(full deposition at the link)




'Hello... FBI, DOJ, IRS and the US Marshals? This is Florida calling.


We'll keep the lights on for you.'

[glowing]

1. Hello, its worse than the mob's books.

[drm604]

2. Un. Friggin. Believable.

And still the right keeps throwing out the phrase "lax paperwork". :mad:

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Xipe Totec]

4. K&R

[flyarm]

5. They were illegally using Military personal Social Security numbers to gain Military documents on

other military people. All illegal. Fraud committed on our military people! As well as non military .
I would imagine it could also have been used on Vets?????

How many more law firms can you imagine throughout this country were practicing this for the banks? anyone want to make a wild guess??????????


PAY ATTENTION TO THIS SECTION!!
They
23 would be stamped and signed by a notary or not. Per
24 floor we had a designated spot to place them and Cheryl
25 would come once a day and sign them.
22
1 Q Sign them as what?
2 A As –
3 Q For the bank?
4 A Correct.
5 Q Or for MERS or whoever it was for?
6 A Correct.
7 Q Would these notaries be there watching her as
8 she signed?
9 A No.
10 Q She would just sit there and sign stacks of
11 them?
12 A Correct. As far as notaries go in the firm I
13 don’t think any notary actually used their own notary
14 stamp. The team used them.
15 Q There were just stamps around?
16 A Yes.
17 Q And you actually saw that?
18 A I was part of that.
19 Q You did it? Are you a notary?
20 A No, I’m not.
21 Q Did you sign as a witness?
22 A I did not. I signed as a witness on one
23 document and after that I decided that I didn’t want to
24 put my name as a witness anymore.
25 Q Tell me about the stamps. You stamped them?
23
1 A Yeah, I had stamps. Each team had a notary on
2 them or notaries that I was aware of. Whether they were
3 or weren’t wasn’t –
4 Q You had stamps?
5 A Correct. We would stamp them and they would
6 get signed.
7 Q Stamp them in blanks?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Who would sign them?
10 A Other people on the team that could sign the
11 signature of the person or just a check on there or
12 whatever.
13 Q Was that common practice?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Was that standard practice?
16 A Pretty much.
17 Q What about the witnesses?
18 A Those would be signed by juniors who were –
19 Q Standing there?
20 A Here, sign this. It has to go to Cheryl, sign
21 it. Then it would go and sit at the desk where Cheryl
22 would sign everything.
23 Q Out of view of the notary and out of view of
24 the witnesses?
25 A Correct.
....
9 A There were people that were responsible for
10 signing Cheryl’s name. Cheryl, Tammie Sweat, and Beth
11 Cerni. Those were the only three people that could sign
12 Cheryl’s name. If you ever look at assignments you’ll
13 see that they are not all the same.
....
1 Q What do you mean falsify a military document?
2 A Well, I’m using the main defendant’s social
3 security number on somebody else’s name, not his name.
4 John Doe and the main defendant was James, I was taking
5 James’ social security number and putting John Doe’s
6 name in there. I wasn’t but that’s what the practice
7 was. The judges started saying we’re not going to
8 consider service completed until –
9 Q There’s a miliary search?
10 A Correct.
11 Q So why wouldn’t they use the right social
12 security number for the right person?
13 A Because you don’t have a social for an NKA or
14 unknown tenant. They wouldn’t enter a final judgement
15 unless the military doc was there.
16 Q So you just used anybody’s?
17 A Correct

[molly77]

21. Wonder if this will be solved in the US DOJ

way. Lower level employees go to jail. CEOs and banksters are hit with a fine.Oh, and the lower level employees will be democrats, probably black.

[Missy Vixen]

6. I hope she has counsel

I also hope that she has a safe place to stay. If I was in her shoes, I'd be terrified.

This is explosive, and it reminds me (again) that the tobacco companies were brought down by a temp.

Go get 'em, Tammie Lou.

[Ruby the Liberal]

7. In her full depo at the link she refers to her attorney

Said she supplied him/her with all of the documentation and emails proving her accusations.

[surrealAmerican]

10. If what she says is true ...

... (and we have no reason to doubt that it is) there exists a MASSIVE quantity of physical evidence to back up her statements. It would do them no good to harm her.

[flyarm]

12. she was already deposed in court She did a Full Deposition

anyone who fucks with her now ..better think again..

of course our shadow government of spooks..well you know the drill by now.


here is her deposition:



Exclusive Bombshell of Foreclosure Fraud – Full Deposition of TAMMIE LOU KAPUSTA Law Office of David J Stern


http://4closurefraud.org/2010/10/07/exclusive-bombshell-of-foreclosure-fraud-full-deposition-of-tammie-lou-kapusta-law-office-of-david-j-stern/

“I personally did not do it because I refused to do it.”
“I wasn’t going to falsify a military document.”
“I was told that that’s fine, somebody else on your team will do it.”

Posted by Foreclosure Fraud on October 7, 2010
We are neck deep in issues today so I do not have time to go through and highlight everything, and there is a lot, but here are some snips…

TAKE THE TIME TO READ THIS IN ITS ENTIRETY

THIS SHOULD BE THE BOMBSHELL THAT STOPS IT ALL IN FLORIDA

MORE TO FOLLOW ON THIS

.......................................................

1 STATE OF FLORIDA
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
2 DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS

3 AG # L10-3-1145

4

5 IN RE:

6 INVESTIGATION OF LAW OFFICES
OF DAVID J. STERN, P.A.
7

8 ____________________________/

9

10

11

12 DEPOSITION OF TAMMIE LOU KAPUSTA

13

14

15

16 12:11 p.m. – 1:58 p.m.
September 22, 2010
17 Office of the Attorney General
110 Southeast 6th Street, 10th Floor
18 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301



1 P R O C E E D I N G S
2 – - -
3 Deposition taken before Kalandra Smith, Court
4 Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of
5 Florida at Large, in the above cause.
6 – - -
7 THEREUPON:
8 TAMMIE LOU KAPUSTA
9 having been first duly sworn or affirmed, was examined
10 and testified as follows:

..........................................................

1 P R O C E E D I N G S
2 – - -
3 Deposition taken before Kalandra Smith, Court
4 Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of
5 Florida at Large, in the above cause.
6 – - -
7 THEREUPON:
8 TAMMIE LOU KAPUSTA
9 having been first duly sworn or affirmed, was examined
10 and testified as follows:



1 Q Let’s go to the assignments of mortgage. They
2 were prepared in-house?
3 A Yeah.
4 Q You’re smiling. You want to tell me about
5 them?
6 A Assignments were done sometimes after the
7 final judgement was entered.
8 Q Do you know why that is?
9 A Because that’s what we were directed to do



19 Q Can you tell me the execution of the
20 assignments, how it worked?
21 A Assignments were prepared again from the
22 casesum. All of our stuff comes from the casesum. They
23 would be stamped and signed by a notary or not. Per
24 floor we had a designated spot to place them and Cheryl
25 would come once a day and sign them.
22
1 Q Sign them as what?
2 A As –
3 Q For the bank?
4 A Correct.
5 Q Or for MERS or whoever it was for?
6 A Correct.
7 Q Would these notaries be there watching her as
8 she signed?
9 A No.
10 Q She would just sit there and sign stacks of
11 them?
12 A Correct. As far as notaries go in the firm I
13 don’t think any notary actually used their own notary
14 stamp. The team used them.
15 Q There were just stamps around?
16 A Yes.
17 Q And you actually saw that?
18 A I was part of that.
19 Q You did it? Are you a notary?
20 A No, I’m not.
21 Q Did you sign as a witness?
22 A I did not. I signed as a witness on one
23 document and after that I decided that I didn’t want to
24 put my name as a witness anymore.
25 Q Tell me about the stamps. You stamped them?
23
1 A Yeah, I had stamps. Each team had a notary on
2 them or notaries that I was aware of. Whether they were
3 or weren’t wasn’t –
4 Q You had stamps?
5 A Correct. We would stamp them and they would
6 get signed.
7 Q Stamp them in blanks?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Who would sign them?
10 A Other people on the team that could sign the
11 signature of the person or just a check on there or
12 whatever.
13 Q Was that common practice?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Was that standard practice?
16 A Pretty much.
17 Q What about the witnesses?
18 A Those would be signed by juniors who were –
19 Q Standing there?
20 A Here, sign this. It has to go to Cheryl, sign
21 it. Then it would go and sit at the desk where Cheryl
22 would sign everything.
23 Q Out of view of the notary and out of view of
24 the witnesses?
25 A Correct.
24
1 Q Do you know who implemented this procedure?
2 A Cheryl.
3 Q Cheryl did?
4 A Um-hum.
5 Q Did anybody else sign with the firm for the
6 banks?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Who was that?
9 A There were people that were responsible for
10 signing Cheryl’s name. Cheryl, Tammie Sweat, and Beth
11 Cerni. Those were the only three people that could sign
12 Cheryl’s name. If you ever look at assignments you’ll
13 see that they are not all the same.
14 MS. EDWARDS: What are the names again?
15 Cheryl, Tammie?
16 THE WITNESS: Tammie Sweat and Beth Cerni.
17 MS. EDWARDS: Could you spell that.
18 MS. CLARKSON: C-E-R-N-I.
19 BY MS. CLARKSON:
20 Q Did they practice Cheryl’s signature?
21 A I would assume so.
22 Q Did you ever see them?
23 A Not practicing but I’ve seen them sign it.
24 Q Did you see somebody sign Cheryl’s name?
25 A Yes.
25
1 Q That wasn’t Cheryl?
2 A Yes. All the time.
3 Q Did Cheryl know about this?
4 A Yes.
5 Q Was it at her direction?
6 A Yes.



16 Q Did anyone quit as far as you know due to the
17 practices?
18 A I’m sure but they wouldn’t come right out and
19 say I quit because of the practices. I know that people
20 had left because they were uncomfortable with the things
21 that they were being asked to do, as most of us were.
22 When it got really sticky there were a lot of us that
23 weren’t here.
24 Q What does really sticky mean?
25 A They wanted us to start changing the documents
33
1 and stuff and doing stuff that we weren’t supposed to be
2 doing as far as service.
3 Q What documents did they want you to change?
4 A Manpower documents. A lot of judges started
5 requiring, because of the Jane and John Doe issues,
6 required that you have a military search for all the
7 defendants. If you named a Jane and John Doe as an NKA
8 you had to pull a military search on them. Unless you
9 have somebody’s social security number technically you
10 can’t pull a military search supposedly.
11 The program that we used for the program that
12 we used, you could put in the main defendant’s social
13 security and John or Jane Doe’s name and it would give
14 us a military search saying that they were in the
15 military.
16 Q You would get their social security number
17 because the bank documents contained it?
18 A Correct. The lenders, the referrals had the
19 socials.
20 Q Did you put the social in on everybody to find
21 out their address for service?
22 A Not everybody. I personally did not do it
23 because I refused to do it. I wasn’t going to falsify a
24 military document. I was told that that’s fine,
25 somebody else on your team will do it.
1 Q What do you mean falsify a military document?
2 A Well, I’m using the main defendant’s social
3 security number on somebody else’s name, not his name.
4 John Doe and the main defendant was James, I was taking
5 James’ social security number and putting John Doe’s
6 name in there. I wasn’t but that’s what the practice
7 was. The judges started saying we’re not going to
8 consider service completed until –
9 Q There’s a miliary search?
10 A Correct.
11 Q So why wouldn’t they use the right social
12 security number for the right person?
13 A Because you don’t have a social for an NKA or
14 unknown tenant. They wouldn’t enter a final judgement
15 unless the military doc was there.
16 Q So you just used anybody’s?
17 A Correct.

9 A So what we had to do from that point, again
10 the affidavits were still split in two pages, at that
11 point we were supposed to be sending them back to the
12 banks to be signed now. The problem being that a lot of
13 times we wouldn’t get them back or executed in time for
14 the hearings. So we had what they called signature
15 pages that Tammie Sweat or someone else would have in
16 their possession. If we couldn’t get it back from the
17 bank executed in time we would just take a signature
18 page and put it on the affidavit.
19 Q What was on the signature page?
20 A The signature and notary from the bank.
21 Q Were these documents photocopied or were they
22 original documents?
23 A Some were photocopied.
24 Q How would you get that many from a bank
25 original? The bank supplied them to you.
42
1 A Well, what would happen would be like if I had
2 file A and that one didn’t go to hearing because there
3 was something wrong with it and file B was going to
4 hearing but it was the same bank, I would take the
5 signature page from A and give it to B.
6 Q Oh give it to another file?
7 A And just re-execute this file.
8 Q Okay. That was common practice?
9 A Yes, after Cheryl couldn’t sign.
10 Q Did Cheryl know?
11 A Yes.
12 Q Cheryl knew about all the practices because
13 she is the one who ran the office?
14 A She was the one who implemented them.
15 Q Were there any other activities or practices
16 over at David Stern’s firm that made you feel
17 uncomfortable or that you were unwilling to do?
18 A I don’t know how to answer that question.
19 It’s a loaded one.
20 Q Take your time.
21 A Yeah. Some of the things that were done there
22 just were not on the up and up.
23 Q Explain to me in as much detail as you can
24 what those things were.
25 A I don’t even know where to start with it.

Now that’s some BULLSHIT!

~

MUCH MORE IN THE DEPO BELOW…

~

4closureFraud.org


**XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX**
EDIT TO MAKE SURE YOU SEE THIS PART!!
PAY ATTENTION TO THIS SECTION!!
They
23 would be stamped and signed by a notary or not. Per
24 floor we had a designated spot to place them and Cheryl
25 would come once a day and sign them.
22
1 Q Sign them as what?
2 A As –
3 Q For the bank?
4 A Correct.
5 Q Or for MERS or whoever it was for?
6 A Correct.
7 Q Would these notaries be there watching her as
8 she signed?
9 A No.
10 Q She would just sit there and sign stacks of
11 them?
12 A Correct. As far as notaries go in the firm I
13 don’t think any notary actually used their own notary
14 stamp. The team used them.
15 Q There were just stamps around?
16 A Yes.
17 Q And you actually saw that?
18 A I was part of that.
19 Q You did it? Are you a notary?
20 A No, I’m not.
21 Q Did you sign as a witness?
22 A I did not. I signed as a witness on one
23 document and after that I decided that I didn’t want to
24 put my name as a witness anymore.
25 Q Tell me about the stamps. You stamped them?
23
1 A Yeah, I had stamps. Each team had a notary on
2 them or notaries that I was aware of. Whether they were
3 or weren’t wasn’t –
4 Q You had stamps?
5 A Correct. We would stamp them and they would
6 get signed.
7 Q Stamp them in blanks?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Who would sign them?
10 A Other people on the team that could sign the
11 signature of the person or just a check on there or
12 whatever.
13 Q Was that common practice?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Was that standard practice?
16 A Pretty much.
17 Q What about the witnesses?
18 A Those would be signed by juniors who were –
19 Q Standing there?
20 A Here, sign this. It has to go to Cheryl, sign
21 it. Then it would go and sit at the desk where Cheryl
22 would sign everything.
23 Q Out of view of the notary and out of view of
24 the witnesses?
25 A Correct.
....
9 A There were people that were responsible for
10 signing Cheryl’s name. Cheryl, Tammie Sweat, and Beth
11 Cerni. Those were the only three people that could sign
12 Cheryl’s name. If you ever look at assignments you’ll
13 see that they are not all the same.
....
1 Q What do you mean falsify a military document?
2 A Well, I’m using the main defendant’s social
3 security number on somebody else’s name, not his name.
4 John Doe and the main defendant was James, I was taking
5 James’ social security number and putting John Doe’s
6 name in there. I wasn’t but that’s what the practice
7 was. The judges started saying we’re not going to
8 consider service completed until –
9 Q There’s a miliary search?
10 A Correct.
11 Q So why wouldn’t they use the right social
12 security number for the right person?
13 A Because you don’t have a social for an NKA or
14 unknown tenant. They wouldn’t enter a final judgement
15 unless the military doc was there.
16 Q So you just used anybody’s?
17 A Correct.


****see how Military personel Social security numbers were used Illegally to get Military private records and documents?????????? Illegally!!!!!!!! Hows that Patriot Act and Homeland Security working for our military people now??????????

Looks like our congress and Senate were doing a damn good job attempting to protect the asses of the crooks at the banks and ignoring their own fucking laws they put into effect to fuck the rest of us with ..but oh noooo..those laws, our congress decided were not meant to fuck the big bank boys and crooks! NO NO NO>.that would never do..so they voted in SECRET AND DID NOT RECORD ANY ONE IN CONGRESS'S VOTES..so they could cover the asses of their elite buddies in the banking industry!!



***just do a little google of : Senator Patrick Leahy and Foreclosures..

This is just the first few hits..

Bill may make it harder to contest foreclosures - Business - ...
Story: Foreclosures seen slowing as document flaws emerge ... Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy pressed to have the bill rushed through the special ...

www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39556377/ns/business-real_estate - Similar
Senate Shockingly Passes Bill That Could Bail The Banks Out Of ...
Oct 7, 2010 ... phoenix foreclosure The hottest story right now in the banking industry ... Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy pressed to have the bill rushed ...

www.businessinsider.com/bank-foreclosure-bill-leahy-2..... - Similar
Think Progress » Obama To Veto 'Robo-Foreclosure' Bill
Oct 7, 2010 ... 43 Responses to “Obama To Veto 'Robo-Foreclosure' Bill” .... We must call, write , and otherwise pester Patrick Leahy and Bob Casey until ...

thinkprogress.org/2010/10/07/obama-vetos-banks/ - Similar
Obama Pulls a Pocket Veto on Foreclosure Bill - Truthdig
Oct 7, 2010 ... TAGS: bill foreclosure mortgage notary obama pelosi pocket veto subprime ... unanimous consent, Patrick Leahy D VT., the same one who is ...

www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/obama_pulls_a_po..... - Similar
How The Controversial Foreclosure Bill Made It Through ...
Oct 7, 2010 ... How The Controversial Foreclosure Bill Made It Through Congress ... This will search the titles of the threads in the Patrick Leahy forum ...

[defendandprotect]

8. Hope those investigating and witnesses manage to stay alive -- !!!

[xchrom]

9. Recommend

[dkf]

11. Those notaries are sure doing a good job of keeping forged signatures out of the system.

Its a joke.

[flvegan]

13. What they don't know, is that this has been going on for a decade.

[Occulus]

16. It's all just a conspiracy theory.

Ignore the man behind the curtain.

[bobalew]

22. As IN FAirbanks Capital, of Salt Lake city

Yeah, back in 2003, they stole my Cousin's place with one of these "For closure Mill" Scams, And they've been doing it for that long, even longer, for those who can ill afford to defend themselves, or their homes. These are pure predators, and the Sub-prime loan servicers are in cahoots, if not the actual foreclosure mill. I Do hope that this Busts in to the mainstream. Period, and exposes the whole Scam created by these predators.

[madfloridian]

14. Al Cardenas of that firm... Dem chair Karen Thurman works with him?

I know she did get paid by him for a while. From 2008

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2008/12/thurman-still-o.html

"Karen Thurman, expected to easily win re-election as chairwoman of the Florida Democratic Party on Saturday, has reconfigured her strange-bedfellows partnership with Miami lawyer/lobbyist Al Cardenas.

Cardenas, the former chairman of the Republican Party of Florida, was paying Thurman $3,500 a month to help his law firm lobby the Democratic-controlled Congress on behalf of MIami-Dade County. But Thurman said today that she and one of the firm's partners, Eric Gould, formed their own lobbying firm. Cardenas still has the Miami-Dade contract, Thurman said, but now he subcontracts with Thurman Gould LLC. Gould is a Democrat who worked for Thurman when she served in Congress.


Read more: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2008/12/thurman-still-o.html#ixzz11yHb9igI

[seafan]

17. These incestuous relationships are what weaken progressive Democratic advancement in Florida.

There should be no mercy in rooting out these hindrances that worm their way into the state party leadership.

The primary election mess we went through here in Florida in 2008, as you documented relentlessly, madfloridian, was proof positive that the state party is crippled severely.

There is no excuse for allowing compromised people to hold leadership positions in the state Democratic Party.

[wildbilln864]

15. k & r!! nt

[pattmarty]

18. Ya gotta love it, "disgruntled FORMER employee". Can't we protect.......

........these disgruntled former employees? There are so many goddamn things wrong with this country now, how and where do you start?

[Jefferson23]

19. Incredible! K&R, thanks for posting. n/t

[SemperEadem]

20. a-bloody-mazing

and I'm supposed to believe that she's a disgruntled employee who's mad
because she can no longer take part in a criminal enterprise?