February 28, 2014 Joanne Remke California State Bar 1149 South Hill St. Los Angeles, CA 90015 [email protected] Re: Computer Chip, JD Gene Cooper - Investigation Report Remke, Bar Scalps, This summarizes an esquire-business situation with one listed on your roster: Eugene Howard Cooper - #100602 Southwestern University Law School, Los Angeles 39317 Riverbend St. Palmdale, CA 93551 This man also owns “Computer Chip”, a Saugus, California computer service repair shop. I’ve been a client of Mr. Cooper’s for over seven years. The vast majority of my service contracts with Mr. Cooper involved simply backing up and restoring my Windows Operating system to a basic functional state. My position is the Gene Cooper has breached his contract duty of good faith and fair dealings: An action for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing requires an underlying agreement of some sort, like an oral or written contract. In every contract there is an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by each party not to do anything which will deprive the other parties of the benefits of the contract, and a breach of this covenant by failure to deal fairly or in good faith gives rise to an action for damages. I. Background This morning I left a frustrated, emotionally charged service contract dispute message with the computer. As soon as I arrived here in Santa Clarita, I immediately began experiencing frequent, repeated computer crashes. This required that I take my computer in for repair. Gene Cooper was recommended to me, a solo operator in Saugus. Gene Cooper also happens to be a lawyer. He went to law school and earned his Juris Doctor degree. Every time this exact same “crash” happened, to conduct a simple system repair, Gene downloaded or backed up my entire computer drive to an external memory unit. Not once did Gene Cooper assure me that took basic precautions to preserve the privacy and confidentiality of my work product by erasing my files. Not once has Gene Cooper ever assured me that he never viewed, forwarded or sold any of my files to any other person, private or public. Gene Cooper never had my oral or written consent to view, forward or sell any of my work product property to anyone. That the confidentiality and privacy of my property taken to and entrusted with Gene, for computer repair purposes only, was obviously a core “implied material term” in my service contract with Gene. This is particularly delicate in light of all of my years of research, investigation and proprietary “Inside Information” that led up to my formally acknowledged “original, high quality” whistle blowing projects. These projects have been formally acknowledged by both the SEC and CFTC. My “document property” directly relates to scores of very valuable, highly sensitive contract based financial crimes: price fixing, accounting fraud and securities fraud, among other legal matters. Again, Gene Cooper has completely failed to assure me that he took any measure to insure the confidentiality, security and privacy of my intellectual property. I trusted Gene for about seven years. Recently, however, he has conducted himself in such a way that caused me to question his compliance with the contract duties owed to me, a “good client” according to Gene. Some “red flags” that caused me to question Gene’s client-contract fidelity derive from two client sources: me and a referral I gave to gene, my Godmother and aunt. II. My Contract(s) With Gene Cooper With regard to me, in my last “Repair” meeting with him, some of “Gene’s suspicious behaviors” include: a. Tampering With My Computer User Windows In my last service contract with Gene, Gene unilaterally closed out one of my “User Windows”. That window was named “Lucretia”. Without referencing my Lucretia User Window, Gene told me he took it upon himself to put all of My-Ms. P. files into my single user window. I did not have a “Ms. P.” user window. Gene knew that. By his acts coupled with his words, at a minimum Gene confirmed he trespassed into my document property, snooped around, reviewed my captions and reorganized my files without permission. That’s called civl and criminal trespass, exceeding the limited scope of our contract: “make backup copies, restore my system and erase my “papers”, nothing else. b. Exceeded Scope, Trespass The law of “entering” another’s property on this computer property subject is identical to the law of real property. Maybe Gene forgot about it this textbook and common sense law. Regardless, under the circumstances a reminder is in order: i. In general, California does recognize a trespass claim where the target exceeds the scope of the consent. ii. It seems clear, however, that a trespass may occur if the party, entering pursuant to a limited consent, . . . proceeds to exceed those limits . . .. iii. Trespass is a strict liability tort in the sense that the defendants motivation or good faith belief is irrelevant. Miller v. NBC,187 Cal.App.3d 1463, 1480-81, 232 Cal.Rptr. 668 (The defendant is liable for an intentional entry although he has acted in good faith, under the mistaken belief, however reasonable, that he is committing no wrong.). iv. Ignorance or mistake of law or fact is not an excuse for trespass. a. “Lawyers Are FBI’s Most Valuable Assets” In my most recent computer repair meeting with Gene, Gene went out of his way to volunteer these words, verbatim: “You know Cash, lawyers are FBI’s most valuable assets; they’re friends.” I responded, “Gene, I’ve sent you some of my Bar and FBI files, based on those certified details you sure should know that “FBI is no friend of mine. They stole my computers in 2001 and refuse to return that private property. They aided and abetted a double jeopardy prosecution against me. They put on materially misleading about me in their “Investigation Reports”. Some of the information FBI suppressed in my case is the very information SEC and CFTC have confirmed to be high quality, original proof of enormous financial crimes.” Gene responded, “Well that was a long time ago,” insinuating that it’s “water under the bridge” and I that I shouldn’t pursue their capital crimes against me in this regard. Bottom line, FBI has been using other people to cryptically send me messages. “Valuable” my file property is. But I am not and have never been “An FBI Asset”. If FBI wants me to be “An Asset”, it can hire and pay me, but it never has. There are many other “red flag” details with regard to my very limited repair contract relationship with Gene Cooper, which have conclusively been breached. III. My Aunt’s Repair Contract With Gene Cooper In addition to my “computer fix” contract with Gene Cooper, because I originally trusted Gene, I gave Gene a referral, my aunt and Godmother. I recently learned that, pursuant to my recommendation, my aunt took her computer to Gene for repair. a. Gene’s Price Discrimination In addition to my “computer fix” contract with Gene Cooper, because I originally trusted Gene, I gave Gene a referral, my aunt and Godmother. I recently learned that, pursuant to my recommendation, my aunt took her computer to Gene for repair. I was informed that for the exact same repair service, Gene charged my aunt a whole lot more than he charged me. Gene typically charged me $80 for this service. He charged my Aunt and Godmother, when she took it in to him, $150.00. This is called “coming up” on a senior citizen who lives on a very tight budget. It is a contract price crime. Gene as a lawyer, one who admitted to reading information about me and my price economic background on the web, knows or should know this. b. Gene’s Last Repair Left Computer “Remotely Controlled” Gene’s most recent repair job of my aunt’s computer left it in a radically odd state. It turns itself on from a completely turned off state. My “other computer guy”, a trusted friend and “computer science teacher” confirmed that the only way that could happen is if someone has a mirrored control panel on your computer. I am intimately familiar with this problem. It happens to me not infrequently. It first began happening back in 2000. No one has authorization to remotely access either my aunt or my computers. Being that, as Gene Cooper advised, “Lawyers like you Cash are FBI’s most valuable asset”, it is no leap in logic to deduce that FBI (and possibly others) have unauthorized, direct access to my entire computer hard drive. IV. Contract Breach, “Red Flag” Cues, Pissy – If you know Gene Cooper just a little, then you know he’s an odd cat, a loner, the nerd-type. He’s exactly the type easily influenced, impressed by and even used by someone claming to be, for example, FBI or CIA. Gene is a goofy man, sometimes emitting a smug and “pissy” attitude. He actually got pissy with me when my aunt bought a computer from someone other than him some years back. I brought her new computer in for repair to Gene. Instead of thanking me for the business, he got pissy with me because she did not buy a new computer from him. Of base in the extreme, that’s what I observed by this bizarre conduct of Gene’s. Gene explained to me that he could build a computer that’s much better than what one buys over the counter, that’s why I should have had my aunt buy from him – and nobody else. Like my computer, my aunt’s new computer “crashed” not infrequently, with the exact same problem I had. That identical problem, again, required copying the entire hard drive, simply running a Restore System CD, then copying the files back into the cleaned up computer. My aunt is a real estate agent and keeps her confidential client files on her hard drive. Again, Gene had access to all of this private information, yet offered zero assurance that he: 1) erased the backed up files when the computer was “Restored”, 2) Never snooped around or read her files, 3) never forwarded those files to anyone, and 4) never sold those files to anyone or otherwise use them for personal gain. This “Computer Chip” shop that Gene owns has no business protocol insuring his client files are destroyed once put back into the computer, for client privacy. Moreover, Gene does not provide any client accounting for the labor time involved in simple “Restore System” services. Gene conceals from clients how long it actually takes to provide his service. Gene also has not “hourly rate” that he shares with clients. Gene has no “List of Services” price list, which renders it impossible for current or prospective clients to price comparison shop. These details are exactly how this Lawyer-Trained computer guy does service contract business, which isn’t real “inspiring” to me. V. 02-28-14 – My Message to Gene About the above and other client service contract business issues I have with Gene, on 02-28-14, up early, I called Gene and left a mixed frustrated business message. In me, many business issues had been festering for a long time. The icing on this was recently learning that he charged my aunt, a senior citizen on a very tight budget, double what he charged me for the same service. At about 5:30 A.M. this moringing I left a message with Gene. I prefaced with the reality that I was up early because I have a lot on my plate, taxes and a possible IRS audit included. It is tax season. Overcharging my aunt, so I felt, was one clear message I left. I mentioned intentional price crimes, Antitrust, for which there is no insurance and there is no bankruptcy protection. I used some stern and colorful language, I called him an F---ing swine” for charging my aunt double what he charged me for the same service. a. Gene’s First Call Back, 02-28-14 Later in the day Gene returned my call and left this message, which I meticulously transcribed, verbatim: Gene’s Voice Message 1 Yea, high this is Gene. I don’t, you know Cash, I don’t what your. I don’t even know what you’re talking about. Who is your godmother? The only other person I know that you know, besides your old girlfriend, is, uh, I don’t know, I thought she was your aunt or something. I’ve never received any complaints. I don’t know. You know. You’re just. God, the stuff I read about you on line, I see it’s really true. Why don’t you, you know, come up with some information, you know, instead of just going around being a nut. No wonder you were - See, what I read online about you, under that that case of yours, God - I can see some mental illness going on here. Anyway, why don’t you call be back and tell me exactly what you’re talking about. I don’t even know who your Godmother is. So, and I’ve never gotten any complaints about any service from anyone that knows you. So why don’t you call me back. Anyway, why don’t you call me back and tell me what you’re talking about. So, call me back. [End Message] Before I retrieved this first message, after a gap in time, Gene called back again and left a second message on my voice mail. b. Gene’s Second Call Back, 02-28-14 Like his first voice mail message, I meticulously transcribed Gene’s second voice mail: Cash, this is Gene one more time after your lovely message. Um, listen I’m on you, I know your history. I got a recording of your, of your um, message. And, you know, if you want to um, discuss this, you know, first apologize, and then we can maybe discuss it. But otherwise, if you continue this harassment I’m going, it is going to be reported to the police. And, um, you know, I’m not going to put up with your crap. If you have some sort of problem, take it somewhere else. I have been advised to tell you this. And um, so we are onto you. You just better cool it. And, you know, like I said, if you want to apologize you can possibly redeem yourself. But otherwise you better just take it somewhere else. We are on to you. We know where you’re at. I know your history. It’s all over the website, of the State Bar. So uh, you know, just consider yourself advised - and warned, OK. Thank you. [End Message] This is a freaky message from a freaky man. Are you and your “advisers” stalking me? VI. Closing About business, there are some things that really “chap my hide”. Those things include: a. Liars; b. Bullies; c. Thieves; d. Contract cheaters; e. Disclosure breaches; f. Price-fixing gougers; g. Those whose play games; h. White-collar social deviants; and i. Users and sneaky “pick pockets”, e.g. These personality types frustrate, irritate and anger me. How about you? White collar deviance is distinguished from common crime in a number of ways. The most distinctive aspect of white-collar deviance is the rational execution of the offense, along with the use of power, influence, or respectability to minimize detection. Equally distinctive but less obvious are: (1) the deviant’s respectable self image, (2) the victim’s unwitting cooperation, and (3) society’s relative fear of retaliation by such people (who control the local military), which is often projected as relative indifference toward the offense. This computer service contract shop doesn’t provide any client showing that his prices charged are set in good faith, compliant with a textbook cost study, based on compensable time serving. What is the Bar controller’s position on the above details? How does a computer guy (who is also an inactive lawyer) validate or legitimize his business behaviors under these circumstances? Kind regards, members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Member/Detail/100602 Racine & Laramie, Ltd. v. Dep’t of Parks and Recreation, 11 Cal. App. 4th 1026, 1031-32, 1033 n.4, 14 Cal. Rptr. 335, 338-39, 340 n.4 (1992); Smith v. City and County of San Francisco, 225 Cal. App. 3d 38, 49, 275 Cal. Rptr. 17, 24 (1990); Peterson Dev. Co. v. Torrey Pines Bank, 233 Cal. App. 3d 103, 116, 284 Cal. Rptr. 367, 375 (1991). Sutherland v. Barclays American/Mortgage Corp., 53 Cal. App. 4th 299, 314, 61 Cal. Rptr. 2d 614 (1997); Harm v. Frasher, 181 Cal. App. 2d 405, 415, 5 Cal. Rptr. 367, 373 (1960); Seaman’s Direct Buying Serv., Inc. v. Standard Oil Co., 36 Cal. 3d 752, 206 Cal. Rptr. 354 (1984), overruled on other grounds, Freeman & Mills, Inc. v. Belcher Oil Co., 11 Cal. 4th 85, 102-03, 44 Cal. Rptr. 420 (1995); see also Witkin, Summary of California Law, Contracts, §743. Baugh v. CBS, Inc., 828 F.Supp. 745, 756 (N.D. Cal. 1993). Civic Western Corp. v. Zila Industries, Inc., 66 Cal. App. 3d 1, 17 (1977). Baugh v. CBS, Inc., 828 F.Supp. 745 (N.D. Cal. 1993). Hobart v. Hagget, 12 Me. 67 (Me. 1835). 02-28-14, first message from Gene Cooper (661-252-2488) to my cellular line. 02-28-14, second call from Gene Cooper (661-252-2488) to my cellular line. Deviant Behavior, by Alex Thio, at page 348 (10th Edition 2010, Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as Allyn & Bacon).
Posted on: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 09:44:20 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015