TO:THE SUPREME COURT,APPELLATE DIVISION FIRST JUDICIAL,DEPARTMENT ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMITTIEES 61 BROADWAY, 2nd FLOOR NEW YORK-NEW YORK,10006 on the date of 2/25/2019 Judge Kim R. Gibson postpone my case once again on the date February 22,2019. Just to state for the record I have voice recording of Nicholas I Timko recorded July 19,2018. discussing the court deferment of September 24,2018 and stating the courtdate will be held on March 18,2019.However on this recording i ask Mr timko July 19,2018 A question is it a possibility that judge Kim R Gibson would postpone my case on March 18,2019 Nicholas i timko stated yes it’s a possibility Judge Kim R Gibson can postpone the case stated Nicholas. Again this information was stated July 19, 2018. Now the judge Gibson once again deferred my case for the reasoning that Mr Nicholas and myself has our differences. But the true reasoning to the court deferments is because I refused to attend a blackmailing conference that’s took place on February 19,2019. My refusal of a mental health exams. Nicholas desperately press the subject to obscure the fact that he called law enforcement on me to get me falsely incarcerated. Johnstown police forge a false police report stated mental health as I also stated on past form. If what I’m stating is hyperbole as far as the false police report the question that needs ask is how come my license to carry a firearm and my bulletproof vest, and firearm was not confiscated To this day I still have possession of it anyone with mental health issues would have had there license to carry firearm revoked.However The July 19, 2018 recording Nicholas statement it’s a possibility for the postponement as timko stated Judge Kim could postpone the trial that was scheduled on March 18, 2019. So this would define that the court had planned before its time to defer the case by any means necessary. The question that needs to be ask is what is the true propensity of the behavior of the courts? I This information is posted on my Facebook and also YouTube. Don’t you find it questionable that Nicholas Timko withdraw himself from my case 24 days to trial. On the July 19,2018 recording. you will notice Mr. Nicholas stating it’s a possibility the judge can defer my case for the trial date March 18, 2019 Also Mr Nicholas lying to me on this recording when i ask the question can this case take up to ten years Timko stated yes but I doubt it. The reason I say Timko is lying is because this case only has a five year limitation and I’m more then certain that Nicholas Timko has this acknowledgement.
I have tried several attempts to hire another Attorney to except representation to my case unfortunately I have been denied by Marcus & Mack and also Edgar Snader I do contain evidence of this fact.Timko stated on Documentation January 22, 2016 that I brandished a Gun, which was August 19, 2015 before he had called Law enforcement on me stating false accusations that I was armed and dangerous with a Bomb on and August21,2015 their was more then several witnesses that where present when this event occurred. The information is one page confidential Attorney and client communication. I also sent over a form to Mr. Nicholas Timko on the Date of March 11,2016 nonConfidential Attorney and client communication explaining Mr. Timko’s cynical behavior. However I hired Mr. Timko on the beginning of February of 2013 I had read over the Date of the Civil Action Complaint but notice that Mr. Timko filed the complaint in The Court of Cambria County Pleas of Pennsylvania on the Date of Nov 3,2014, basically Mr.Timko waited two years to file the Civil Action Complaint. I sent over to you a medical questionnaire that provides the Date February 27,2013 the form was filled out by Mr Nicholas I. Timko, this implies that I hired Mr. Timko in the beginning of the year of 2013 also this implies that Mr.Timko has been negligent toward my case with CSXT transportation.
On the Date of July 30,2015 I sent over thru fax by alpha printing to Sargent personnal Agency my transcript corrections where my Deposition had taken its course of Action, Due to the fact of some errors. If you take a look at the transcript Jonathan Lopez v. CSX transportation vol 1. on page 230 Question 22 and page 231 question 1 line 2 Attorney Ms. Smith who represent CSXT stated a question okay at the time that the impact occurred the train was already in the crossing and over ferndale road? I said yes to the terms that im listening to the question not that I’ve have said yes to the question, Ms. Smith and I had spoken at once so you can discern that I have been misconstrued. If you take a look at the police report witness Mr Richard russak stated that I did not look up but kept walking and I was struck by the train and then out of my line of sight so this would indicate I did not notice the locomotive entering the crossing also the event recording would determine this fact. However the speedometer is not vivid to conta
0 Comments