MissGloverPark Posted January 3, 2006 Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 Martin Austermuhle, Editor-in-Chief, DCist.com has just posted confirmation of what all had said that Fenty did steal money from elderly residents and there was a fight on the WTOP radio over it. This story was in the Post a few months back. Apparently, Fenty did not represent the interests of an elderly client he was charged with serving, but admitted guilt and paid required fines. I doubt this will play a big role in the campaign, though. Martin Austermuhle Editor-in-Chief, DCist.com Also, Eric Linden of Mayor Williams press office can confirm the same. SAM BROOKS ATTACKS ALL WHO ATTACK HIM AND FENTY WITH LIES TO COVER UP WHAT HE AND FENTY HAVE DONE TO CHEAT AND INSULT THE PEOPLE OF DC AND WARD 3! WAKE UP PEOPLE...SAM BROOKS IS A SICK MAN! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCist Martin Posted January 3, 2006 Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 Hold the phone there, MissGloverPark. I did not confirm that any theft occurred. I merely confirmed that a story existed regarding Fenty and an elderly client he represented. Read it for yourself: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...av=rss_metro/dc Fenty was not accused of stealing funds, rather, of a "failure to guard the assets" of his client. He was issued an informal admonition by the Office of the Bar Counsel, their lightest sanction. He admitted fault and the case was closed. This is not theft. Maybe negligence, but that's a far cry from theft. I fail to see how this proves that Fenty or Brooks are cheating the people of Ward 3 or the city. Martin Austermuhle, Editor-in-Chief, DCist.com has just posted confirmation of what all had said that Fenty did steal money from elderly residents and there was a fight on the WTOP radio over it. This story was in the Post a few months back. Apparently, Fenty did not represent the interests of an elderly client he was charged with serving, but admitted guilt and paid required fines. I doubt this will play a big role in the campaign, though. Martin Austermuhle Editor-in-Chief, DCist.com Also, Eric Linden of Mayor Williams press office can confirm the same. SAM BROOKS ATTACKS ALL WHO ATTACK HIM AND FENTY WITH LIES TO COVER UP WHAT HE AND FENTY HAVE DONE TO CHEAT AND INSULT THE PEOPLE OF DC AND WARD 3! WAKE UP PEOPLE...SAM BROOKS IS A SICK MAN! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissGloverPark Posted January 3, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 Martin, I respect you for your never ending, fine jourmalism but it is a matter of the choice of words but it was still a THEFT no matter how you want to phrase it. Martin Austermuhle, Editor-in-Chief, DCist.com has just posted confirmation of what all had said that Fenty did steal money from elderly residents and there was a fight on the WTOP radio over it. This story was in the Post a few months back. Apparently, Fenty did not represent the interests of an elderly client he was charged with serving, but admitted guilt and paid required fines. I doubt this will play a big role in the campaign, though. Martin Austermuhle Editor-in-Chief, DCist.com Also, Eric Linden of Mayor Williams press office can confirm the same. SAM BROOKS ATTACKS ALL WHO ATTACK HIM AND FENTY WITH LIES TO COVER UP WHAT HE AND FENTY HAVE DONE TO CHEAT AND INSULT THE PEOPLE OF DC AND WARD 3! WAKE UP PEOPLE...SAM BROOKS IS A SICK MAN! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCist Martin Posted January 3, 2006 Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 No, if you read the article you'll notice that Fenty did not steal anything, rather, he neglected to properly account for his clients' funds, resulting in a loss of approximately $15,000. This amount was eventually paid back. I know these are details, but they are important details. And you have yet to explain how this proves that Fenty and Brooks are cheating the people of Ward 3 and the city. Martin, I respect you for your never ending, fine jourmalism but it is a matter of the choice of words but it was still a THEFT no matter how you want to phrase it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke_Wilbur Posted January 3, 2006 Report Share Posted January 3, 2006 Thanks for taking the time to clarify this issue Martin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angela Brannon Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 Martin, Correct me if I am wrong but I believe that Mayor Williams suggested that the neglect was more a misuse that benefitted Mr Fenty as if Mayor Williams was implying that Fenty used the money for his own benefit then covered up and only offered to repay once it was known. This reminds me of a similar case at the DC Court of Appeals where an attorney named Terry Kolp did something identical where he mishandled the money for several clients but DC Bar Counsel determined that he used it to build a porch onto his house at 408 5th Street SE but later on was allowed to call it not a theft but a neglect although the Court of Appeals suspended him indeffinitely which you can check the DC Bar Association s record as Kolp plead mental illness to get out of paying back $25k. Maybe Martin it is all symantecs but Fenty would never have given back if what he did had not been uncovered. Martin, I respect you for your never ending, fine jourmalism but it is a matter of the choice of words but it was still a THEFT no matter how you want to phrase it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCist Martin Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 Angela, No one has stated, much less been able to prove, that Fenty sought to keep the money that was taken from the elderly client he represented. In fact, the Post article states that the money was taken by the family of Fenty's client. You can't accuse Fenty of something that he did not do unless you have the evidence to prove it. Do you? Martin Austermuhle Martin, Correct me if I am wrong but I believe that Mayor Williams suggested that the neglect was more a misuse that benefitted Mr Fenty as if Mayor Williams was implying that Fenty used the money for his own benefit then covered up and only offered to repay once it was known. This reminds me of a similar case at the DC Court of Appeals where an attorney named Terry Kolp did something identical where he mishandled the money for several clients but DC Bar Counsel determined that he used it to build a porch onto his house at 408 5th Street SE but later on was allowed to call it not a theft but a neglect although the Court of Appeals suspended him indeffinitely which you can check the DC Bar Association s record as Kolp plead mental illness to get out of paying back $25k. Maybe Martin it is all symantecs but Fenty would never have given back if what he did had not been uncovered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bfrankdc Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 Wow, this only gets better and better all the time. So we have this new poster, "Angela" who off the cuff cites an attorney as it allegedly relates to allegations that the Rees corps are making against Adrian Fenty (and Sam Brooks). Hmm, I wonder: Rees v Kolp, No 97-CV-2853 Does anyone have any information about the above cited personal injury case? Any axe to grind on the part of the Reesists against this Attorney/Doctor Kolp? Do tell, do tell! B. Frank Angela, No one has stated, much less been able to prove, that Fenty sought to keep the money that was taken from the elderly client he represented. In fact, the Post article states that the money was taken by the family of Fenty's client. You can't accuse Fenty of something that he did not do unless you have the evidence to prove it. Do you? Martin Austermuhle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truthseeker Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 Wow, this only gets better and better all the time. So we have this new poster, "Angela" who off the cuff cites an attorney as it allegedly relates to allegations that the Rees corps are making against Adrian Fenty (and Sam Brooks). Hmm, I wonder: Rees v Kolp, No 97-CV-2853 Does anyone have any information about the above cited personal injury case? Any axe to grind on the part of the Reesists against this Attorney/Doctor Kolp? Do tell, do tell! B. Frank B. Frank, you are ROCKIN MY WORLD, man! I salute you, whoever you may be, for continuing to ask questions and dig for the truth...despite the by now predictable schoolyard retaliation from He Whose Name(s) I Shall Not Speak. I await the day when actual working journalists start following your lead. Until then, you're doing us all a service and I for one thank you. The truth will out, as the great detective once said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissGloverPark Posted January 4, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 Martin, You may be right but if you had heard the discussion between Williams and Fenty on WTOP then you would have to admit that the way Fenty spoke, he sounded like he had taken the money but gave it back. Possibly it was a poor choice of words he used but what he said was what it sounded like. Martin, Correct me if I am wrong but I believe that Mayor Williams suggested that the neglect was more a misuse that benefitted Mr Fenty as if Mayor Williams was implying that Fenty used the money for his own benefit then covered up and only offered to repay once it was known. This reminds me of a similar case at the DC Court of Appeals where an attorney named Terry Kolp did something identical where he mishandled the money for several clients but DC Bar Counsel determined that he used it to build a porch onto his house at 408 5th Street SE but later on was allowed to call it not a theft but a neglect although the Court of Appeals suspended him indeffinitely which you can check the DC Bar Association s record as Kolp plead mental illness to get out of paying back $25k. Maybe Martin it is all symantecs but Fenty would never have given back if what he did had not been uncovered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbresloff Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 DCist Martin, You have your facts wrong. The paper reported the matter one way but several radio shows said that Fenty and his real estate broker wife sold the home of a client out from under her with the permission of family members who did not have the legal authority. The court ruled such although the bar association did not pounce on him for it. I am sure that Cropp and the other candidates will bring this issue up again. Angela, No one has stated, much less been able to prove, that Fenty sought to keep the money that was taken from the elderly client he represented. In fact, the Post article states that the money was taken by the family of Fenty\'s client. You can\'t accuse Fenty of something that he did not do unless you have the evidence to prove it. Do you? Martin Austermuhle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bfrankdc Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Radio shows? Such as? Please clue us in as to what radio shows reported this? B. Frank DCist Martin, You have your facts wrong. The paper reported the matter one way but several radio shows said that Fenty and his real estate broker wife sold the home of a client out from under her with the permission of family members who did not have the legal authority. The court ruled such although the bar association did not pounce on him for it. I am sure that Cropp and the other candidates will bring this issue up again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbresloff Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Go and get a copy of the DC Court of Appeals written opinion on this issue and that is where they found Fenty s actions to have constituted a misappropriation and not an error. Radio shows? Such as? Please clue us in as to what radio shows reported this? B. Frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bfrankdc Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 So that means there was no radio show that discussed as you claimed? B. Frank Go and get a copy of the DC Court of Appeals written opinion on this issue and that is where they found Fenty s actions to have constituted a misappropriation and not an error. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissGloverPark Posted January 9, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 If you call Mayor Williams office and ask to speak to his press office but specifically to a guy named ERIC then he will tell you when and where Mayor Williams said Fenty stole that money and Fenty did admit it live on the radio but said he gave it back. Go agead and call Mayor Williams office. So that means there was no radio show that discussed as you claimed? B. Frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bfrankdc Posted February 10, 2006 Report Share Posted February 10, 2006 Coincidence? I think not. It appears that our fine candidate has worked for Terry Kolp. I would also add that the credentials listed in this are not even close to those listed on Mr. Rees's website: http://www.angelfire.com/dc2/jrrees1955/ Jonathan R. Rees P.O. Box 21422 Washington, DC 20009 202-316-3984 jrrees1955@yahoo.com Position Sought: Salary Sought: Law Office Manager $40,000.00 - $50,000.00 Per Year Litigation Case Manager (or) Senior Paralegal Dear Counselor: I am now seeking to make a career change to a small or medium size law firm or corporate law department and be employed by lawyers who can easily see the raw talent I have to offer and want to bring such to their arsenal and benefit. My experience in the legal field has been first six years as a Litigation Paralegal, three years as a Litigation Case Manager and then as a Law Office/Legal Department Manager whereby at each position, I did what most medium to large law firms, government agencies and corporate legal departments expect of their employee in said positions. I have to offer any prospective employer over ten (10) years experience in Legal Office Management consisting of but not limited to Accounting, Customer Service, Marketing, Human Resource Management, Mailroom Operations, Meeting Planning, Policy and Procedures, Purchasing, Vendor Relations, Legal/Legislative Research and Writing, Paralegal Training, Records and Document Management, Litigation Case Management, etcetera within the corporate, government and private law firm legal environments. Also, over the past ten (10) years, I have held down part-time (evenings & weekend) work with various law firms in DC: E.G. Larry Williams & Associates, Kolp & Associates, Nath & Associates, etcetera. At the current time, I am employed by the Government of Puerto Rico as the [Office Manager for the Federal Office of Legal & Legislative Affairs] as a governor's appointee on a term basis whereby I oversee the lobbying of the federal government on all levels which most states do to obtain federal funds, affect pending legislation or to challenge legal and legislative issues as well as challenge the actions of other states and corporate activities within a state before the various administrative agencies and courts of law, but I am looking to achieve upward mobility and that is why I am submitting my Résumé. My experience/strenght in the legal field has been in: 1. Administrative Law; 2. Criminal Law; 3. Domestic Relations Law; 4. Energy Law; and all levels of litigation. Wherefore, please click on this line to see my Résumé >>> Résumé Respectfully submitted, Jonathan R. Rees This reminds me of a similar case at the DC Court of Appeals where an attorney named Terry Kolp did something identical where he mishandled the money for several clients but DC Bar Counsel determined that he used it to build a porch onto his house at 408 5th Street SE but later on was allowed to call it not a theft but a neglect although the Court of Appeals suspended him indeffinitely which you can check the DC Bar Association s record as Kolp plead mental illness to get out of paying back $25k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godfather Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 As Ronald Regan said, he we go again. Just another phony, doctored and linkless posting Coincidence? I think not. It appears that our fine candidate has worked for Terry Kolp. I would also add that the credentials listed in this are not even close to those listed on Mr. Rees's website: http://www.angelfire.com/dc2/jrrees1955/ Jonathan R. Rees P.O. Box 21422 Washington, DC 20009 202-316-3984 jrrees1955@yahoo.com Position Sought: Salary Sought: Law Office Manager $40,000.00 - $50,000.00 Per Year Litigation Case Manager (or) Senior Paralegal Dear Counselor: I am now seeking to make a career change to a small or medium size law firm or corporate law department and be employed by lawyers who can easily see the raw talent I have to offer and want to bring such to their arsenal and benefit. My experience in the legal field has been first six years as a Litigation Paralegal, three years as a Litigation Case Manager and then as a Law Office/Legal Department Manager whereby at each position, I did what most medium to large law firms, government agencies and corporate legal departments expect of their employee in said positions. I have to offer any prospective employer over ten (10) years experience in Legal Office Management consisting of but not limited to Accounting, Customer Service, Marketing, Human Resource Management, Mailroom Operations, Meeting Planning, Policy and Procedures, Purchasing, Vendor Relations, Legal/Legislative Research and Writing, Paralegal Training, Records and Document Management, Litigation Case Management, etcetera within the corporate, government and private law firm legal environments. Also, over the past ten (10) years, I have held down part-time (evenings & weekend) work with various law firms in DC: E.G. Larry Williams & Associates, Kolp & Associates, Nath & Associates, etcetera. At the current time, I am employed by the Government of Puerto Rico as the [Office Manager for the Federal Office of Legal & Legislative Affairs] as a governor's appointee on a term basis whereby I oversee the lobbying of the federal government on all levels which most states do to obtain federal funds, affect pending legislation or to challenge legal and legislative issues as well as challenge the actions of other states and corporate activities within a state before the various administrative agencies and courts of law, but I am looking to achieve upward mobility and that is why I am submitting my Résumé. My experience/strenght in the legal field has been in: 1. Administrative Law; 2. Criminal Law; 3. Domestic Relations Law; 4. Energy Law; and all levels of litigation. Wherefore, please click on this line to see my Résumé >>> Résumé Respectfully submitted, Jonathan R. Rees Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truthseeker Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 (edited) As Ronald Regan said, he we go again. Just another phony, doctored and linkless posting "LINKLESS"?!!! It's RIGHT THERE!!! see? WITHIN THE POST ITSELF?!!! oh, god this is too funny!! hee hee. Edited February 13, 2006 by truthseeker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
factchecker2 Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 Clearly, this link to Jonathan Rees' job application letter/resume works fine: http://www.angelfire.com/dc2/jrrees1955/ Oddly, Rees himself has posted in several places that people can read his resume on his website. But Rees removed his resume from his website a long time ago. Why? As Ronald Regan said, he we go again. Just another phony, doctored and linkless posting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godfather Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 Looks like another phony cut and paste job you guys are doing to mislead people. Furthermore, that is not Rees phone number and never was. Nice try, but I bet now you deleted that link to be able to turn around and acuse Rees of it. Clearly, this link to Jonathan Rees\' job application letter/resume works fine: http://www.angelfire.com/dc2/jrrees1955/ Oddly, Rees himself has posted in several places that people can read his resume on his website. But Rees removed his resume from his website a long time ago. Why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truthseeker Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 (edited) Looks like another phony cut and paste job you guys are doing to mislead people. Furthermore, that is not Rees phone number and never was. Nice try, but I bet now you deleted that link to be able to turn around and acuse Rees of it. Fortunately, someone got a screenshot of it before YOU took it down. Edited February 13, 2006 by truthseeker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bfrankdc Posted February 14, 2006 Report Share Posted February 14, 2006 And thanks to a poster at DCist and Google Cache: http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:lPouyP...us&ct=clnk&cd=1 B. Frank Fortunately, someone got a screenshot of it before YOU took it down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sleazy Sam Posted February 20, 2006 Report Share Posted February 20, 2006 I REST MY CASE...BROOKS IS GUILTY OF AN INTERNET SMEAR CAMPAIGN AGAINST REES AND OTHER CANDIDATES! Let me quote Sam Brooks per the Post article: Sam says he will put down his lemon and vanilla pies if Rees and the others put down theirs. HOW MUCH MORE OF AN ADMISSION TO MUDSLINGING BY BROOKS CAN YOU GET? You people are so stupid that if GOD came along and badmouthed BROOKS you would probably accuse GOD of working for REES. READ THIS AGAIN AND GET A LIF YOU MORONS http://blog.washingtonpost.com/dcwire/2006...ment_typ_1.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts