 |
| Bobby Wightman-Cervantes |
A reader has assembled Mr. Wightman's recent statements, incorporating them into an enthralling mano a mano conversation.
The argument focuses primarily on the October 3 City Commission meeting when an appointment to the GBIC board was considered and the October 17 meeting where Commissioner Tetreau-Kalifa presents the claim that her vote was not counted:
WIGHTMAN: The blogs share and enhance one another on occasion. You are clueless as to the law.
ANONYMOUS: Saying that does not make it true. YOU are the idiot who is clueless.
WIGHTMAN: You refuse to accept I am saying we can assume she did not vote, but the tape still does not get in because the custodian of the record cannot guarantee every thing was recorded as said.
ANONYMOUS: I refuse to accept your weird, warped view that evidence that you don't like is not true. "The Custodian of the Record" crap is just that, crap. It is a video that ANYONE is qualified to judge.
WIGHTMAN: This was Judge Hanens ruling in the Cata case.
ANONYMOUS: And again, who the fuck cares about a case that is not applicable.
WIGHTMAN: This is standard.
ANONYMOUS: It is not the standard just because, once again, you said so.
WIGHTMAN: Tapes or recordings are use to prove a fact which cannot be disputed because it is on the tape [ such as a bank robber holding the gun on the teller], they cannot be used to prove something did not happen.
ANONYMOUS: Yes, they are used to prove things didn't happen all the time.
WIGHTMAN: You do not like the law write judge Hanen and tell him he got it all wrong.
ANONYMOUS: His ruling has no appliciablity in this case, any more that the case of Missouri Pacific vs. Brownsville Navagation District has any bearing on this incident.
WIGHTMAN: You still cannot tell us what document she altered.
ANONYMOUS: Yes, as a mater of fact, I can. It was the offical minutes of the October 3, 2017 Brownsville City Commission meeting.
WIGHTMAN: You know nothing about this system, Commissioners have done the same in the past and then the commission decides if there was a mistake end of story.
WIGHTMAN: Tapes or recordings are use to prove a fact which cannot be disputed because it is on the tape [ such as a bank robber holding the gun on the teller], they cannot be used to prove something did not happen.
ANONYMOUS: Yes, they are used to prove things didn't happen all the time.
WIGHTMAN: You do not like the law write judge Hanen and tell him he got it all wrong.
ANONYMOUS: His ruling has no appliciablity in this case, any more that the case of Missouri Pacific vs. Brownsville Navagation District has any bearing on this incident.
WIGHTMAN: You still cannot tell us what document she altered.
ANONYMOUS: Yes, as a mater of fact, I can. It was the offical minutes of the October 3, 2017 Brownsville City Commission meeting.
WIGHTMAN: You know nothing about this system, Commissioners have done the same in the past and then the commission decides if there was a mistake end of story.
A: Would you just plain quit telling people what they don't know, when obviously they do know. Obfuscation is a fancy word for your agenda driven lies.
WIGHTMAN: Had Martinez and Neece not gone with the threats then there would be no story, issue raised, issue discussed, Jessica loses, end of story. But that is not what happened.
ANONYMOUS: Not end of story. There are the complaints, indictments, and trial.
WIGHTMAN: You refuse to accept how a professional would have handled this.
ANONYMOUS: And that professional would have been you? Give us all a fucking break.
WIGHTMAN: I am not saying she voted.
ANONYMOUS: Yes, you are when the evidence clearly shows otherwise.
WIGHTMAN: I am saying how it was handled was wrong.
ANONYMOUS: You are right. An immediate arrest was called for.
WIGHTMAN: It was not professional.
ANONYMOUS: I saw righteous indignation at a grievous act.
WIGHTMAN: I will not dispute her votes were confusing.
ANNONYMOUS: I will. There is no confusion, she didn't vote.
WIGHTMAN: Hell it happens in Congress all of the time and people pay a price for not paying attention.
ANONYMOUS: Yes, and in this case, what is the price for altering government documents fraudulently?
WIGHTMAN: Like I said, all Martinez and Neece had to do was allow her her say, overrule her complaint and then vote.
ANONYMOUS: But they didn't. They addressed the fraud.
WIGHTMAN: There was no need for threats. Tony and Neece turned it into a needless circus when they could have been professionals and still won the day with no one having a beef.
WIGHTMAN: Had Martinez and Neece not gone with the threats then there would be no story, issue raised, issue discussed, Jessica loses, end of story. But that is not what happened.
ANONYMOUS: Not end of story. There are the complaints, indictments, and trial.
WIGHTMAN: You refuse to accept how a professional would have handled this.
ANONYMOUS: And that professional would have been you? Give us all a fucking break.
WIGHTMAN: I am not saying she voted.
ANONYMOUS: Yes, you are when the evidence clearly shows otherwise.
WIGHTMAN: I am saying how it was handled was wrong.
ANONYMOUS: You are right. An immediate arrest was called for.
WIGHTMAN: It was not professional.
ANONYMOUS: I saw righteous indignation at a grievous act.
WIGHTMAN: I will not dispute her votes were confusing.
ANNONYMOUS: I will. There is no confusion, she didn't vote.
WIGHTMAN: Hell it happens in Congress all of the time and people pay a price for not paying attention.
ANONYMOUS: Yes, and in this case, what is the price for altering government documents fraudulently?
WIGHTMAN: Like I said, all Martinez and Neece had to do was allow her her say, overrule her complaint and then vote.
ANONYMOUS: But they didn't. They addressed the fraud.
WIGHTMAN: There was no need for threats. Tony and Neece turned it into a needless circus when they could have been professionals and still won the day with no one having a beef.
ANONYMOUS: No threats, except for the mayor against Rick, but that wasn't directly concerned with the perjury.
WIGHTMAN: Stop changing my story and tell me how you defend the conduct of the Mayor and Neece which is my issue even if Jessica never voted.
ANONYMOUS: I have to change your story because your are wrong. It is called correcting the record. There is no "even" qualifier involved, she didn't vote.
WIGHTMAN: Stop with the distractions. here is a shocker I get to say what I am saying, not you.
WIGHTMAN: Stop changing my story and tell me how you defend the conduct of the Mayor and Neece which is my issue even if Jessica never voted.
ANONYMOUS: I have to change your story because your are wrong. It is called correcting the record. There is no "even" qualifier involved, she didn't vote.
WIGHTMAN: Stop with the distractions. here is a shocker I get to say what I am saying, not you.
ANONYMOUS: I'm simply pointing out that what you are saying isn't worth a popcorn fart.
WIGHTMAN: You can challenge me by defending Martinez and Neece's conduct.
ANONYMOUS: Ok. Martinez and Longoria should not have engaged in that 3rd grade argument.
WIGHTMAN: But changing my argument only makes you look desperate. And for the record I have given the most detailed information on my blog.
ANONYMOUS: You have given the least unbiased report of the goings on of anyone posting, including Jerry and Juan.
WIGHTMAN: My readership is fine. But I like to feel out the mood in the community so I read the other blogs to feel people out and sometimes get educated when they take me straight on.
ANONYMOUS: No, your numbers are not fine or you wouldn't be blog squatting.
WIGHTMAN: Yes in American my troll we have the right to converse with one another even if you dod not like it.
WIGHTMAN: You can challenge me by defending Martinez and Neece's conduct.
ANONYMOUS: Ok. Martinez and Longoria should not have engaged in that 3rd grade argument.
WIGHTMAN: But changing my argument only makes you look desperate. And for the record I have given the most detailed information on my blog.
ANONYMOUS: You have given the least unbiased report of the goings on of anyone posting, including Jerry and Juan.
WIGHTMAN: My readership is fine. But I like to feel out the mood in the community so I read the other blogs to feel people out and sometimes get educated when they take me straight on.
ANONYMOUS: No, your numbers are not fine or you wouldn't be blog squatting.
WIGHTMAN: Yes in American my troll we have the right to converse with one another even if you dod not like it.
ANONYMOUS: Conversing does not mean lying your ass off about crap.
Troll you can say a billion times Jessica altered the official record and it will not make it true. It is her right to sign an affidavit to challenge the written record. That is all she did, nothing less and nothing more. As you claim she did not steal the city secretaries record and alter it. You must really think the people of Brownsville are stupid if you think they are going to believe you when you say she stole the record and changed it.
ReplyDeleteAs to Judge Hanen's ruling I will be posting tonight at about 11. I prefer to prepare my posts the day before otherwise I will be late in posting.
The Presas-Garcia case involved the tape from the meeting, This tape involves the tape from the meeting. Do tell troll, who is that different. I have included the tape so everyone can see the evidence. This issue is not whether she voted. It is Ben Neeces bogus threat. I concede during the confusing vote. There was a call for a roll call and Martinez just say there doing nothing until his hand was forced to take a vote. That is a fact even a troll can see on the video. Initially on the tape you can see Jessica's mouth did not move and she asked if she was even allowed to vote. Before she could get a ruling from counsel Tony interrupted and the camera went to the list of candidates as Tony spoke loud. So the video during this part does not show if Jessica voted or not after she decided should could vote. The camera is on the list of candidates with Tony talking loud making impossible to know what was or was not said. that is the tape,
You can read Judge Hanen's ruling yourself. If the tape raises doubt it is not evidence. That is what I said. That is what judge Hanen said, and with the name of the candidates on the screen instead of the commissioners during Tony's loud final vote no one can say what the tape would have shown because it was not on the commissioners during the final count. Facts troll
Bobby WC
I'm with the troll. You're boring now, Wightman.
DeleteAlso troll which i will add to my post for 11, after Jessica asked if she could vote the was a light voice which cannot be understood. Do tell use whose voice that was and what that person said. Because if you cannot the tape is not complete. In presas-Garcia's case, the tape did not contain what Presas-Garcia said it would contain. Judge Hanen said it coulnd not be used against her because the tape was not definitive. What is the difference troll?
ReplyDeleteBobby WC
Bobby keeps calling the anon a troll. Has he looked in a mirror recently?
ReplyDeleteHi Ben! It's probably wise to deflect this attention to Ms. J Tetreau instead of the way you have been diverting un-auditable funds to the BPOA and others. From un-auditable to inaudible! I love what you did there. What enrichments have you received from these organizations? Mr. Wightman has your campaign finance reports and I know he would like to share more with the class.
ReplyDeleteWho says this is going to be a federal case where Hanen’s opinion on an AUDIO only recording would matter in a case with VIDEO tape evidence?
ReplyDelete“WIGHTMAN: My readership is fine. But I like to feel out the mood in the community so I read the other blogs to feel people out and sometimes get educated when they take me straight on.
ReplyDeleteANONYMOUS: No, your numbers are not fine or you wouldn't be blog squatting.”
What’s blog squatting?
People just blow my mind. Rules of evidence are based on basic constitutional rules. Most federal and state Rules of Evidenec are the same. They even have the same number reference in many cases. The constitution does not die when in state court. Now of course being in Republican Texas I can understand why you would t think so. The police chief will not touch this because of the problems with the tape, and Saenz would laugh in anyone's face who told him the tape proves perjury. The arguments people come up with just blow my mind.
ReplyDeleteBobby WC
Video tape. Video tape. Video tape. Damn that blog squatter is oblivious.
ReplyDelete