Amazing article! The second page has all of the good parts. My favorite parts have been highlighted.

"The Judge scheduled a settlement hearing, a requirement in Colorado before proceeding to trial. The Attorney for WF stated to the court that she didn't know if her client would be available on the date the Judge set. The Judge told her to call her client and verify. She said she would and started to leave the Courtroom. The Judge halted her and said, no, call your client right now. Do you have a phone of your own or do you need to use the Court's phone? Again the Attorney was shaken. The Attorney said she had her own phone and would step out into the hall and call her client. The Judge, again, said no, you will call your client from where you stand, we're all waiting.

The Attorney didn't know the phone number for her client. Had to call her office and they didn't know the phone number for WF. What an image that must have been....

During the Defendant's research she found a website where Attorneys can go to purchase supposed Affidavits from their supposed clients (see attachement). They just fill in the blanks and low and behold an Affidavit appears. Now isn't that slick? The Affidavit that appears is at best defective, at worse, a fraud upon the Court. But don't forget the Rubber Stamp Factor of the Courts."

The fact that courts rubber stamp erroneous judgments based on false affidavits is no surprise and nothing new, although the public is becomming more and more aware of how frequently it is actually occuring. For a crystal clear example, check out the 10-9-07 POTW, "Dot Peel, A Liar for Hire", where the author of a false affidavit admitted she lied, yet, Wells Fargo and ORIX were still sucessful in stealing the property thanks to a rubber stamped ruling.

Shoot, I wish I could get a rubber stamped judgment lol..