Skip navigation

Deric Lostutter has become a bit active after not saying or doing much since he began serving his sentence in mid-April. Included in his latest handwritten filing are some criticisms of the defendants in his lawsuit including Michelle McKee who had been dropped from the lawsuit earlier this year.

The document starts of routine enough with Deric stating he is withdrawing his motion for oral arguments that would have required the defendants to appear in court.

Deric’s first stated reason for the withdrawing of his motion is the fact that he is in jail serving a 24 month prison term and that this would not allow him his constitutional rights.

His second reason is a bit more interesting:

Deric states that the reason the defendants atty has withdrawn from the case is due to unethical actions on the part of Thomas Olsen.

Deric also claims that Michelle McKee who was dropped from his lawsuit provided him “with an abundance of evidence” of what he claims were plots against him and his family by defendants Olsen and Goddard.

Both Goddard and Olsen have filed their own arguments with their former atty and the arguments have yet to be filed to the court as part of their rebuttal and defense against Deric’s civil lawsuit and statements made by Michelle L McKee in her prior filing.

It will be interesting to see how Goddard and Olsen reacts to this latest filing by Deric Lostutter and also if Michelle L McKee makes a response as well.

Stay tuned

MURT

21 Comments

    • Shannon
    • Posted May 27, 2017 at 1:37 pm
    • Permalink

    Where my other comment Mr. Murt ?

      • MURTWITNESSONE
      • Posted May 27, 2017 at 3:38 pm
      • Permalink

      Let me check. It might have gotten swept up in my latest spam sweep. Feel free to repost it.

      MURT

    • Shannon
    • Posted May 27, 2017 at 4:50 am
    • Permalink
    • uh, what?
    • Posted May 22, 2017 at 7:27 am
    • Permalink

    your sources other than pacer are none other than goddard and olsen themselves.

      • MURTWITNESSONE
      • Posted May 22, 2017 at 3:43 pm
      • Permalink

      There is more than one way to obtain court records and filings. Lexis is one and getting them direct from the individual courts is another. The files were submitted but not numbered on PACER which made getting them a bit harder.
      1:16-cv-01098-TDS-JEP LOSTUTTER v. OLSEN et al
      THOMAS D. SCHROEDER, presiding
      JOI ELIZABETH PEAKE, referral
      Date filed: 09/02/2016
      Date of last filing: 05/19/2017

      History
      Doc.
      No. Dates Description
      53
      Filed & Entered: 05/19/2017
      Docket Text Withdrawal of Motion

      Filed & Entered: 05/09/2017 EDITORS NOTE: This line in the PACER outline is where the affidavits were entered.
      Docket Text Motions Submitted
      52
      Filed & Entered: 05/08/2017
      Docket Text Affidavit in Support of Motion

      MURT

        • MURTWITNESSONE
        • Posted May 23, 2017 at 4:03 am
        • Permalink

        Thanks. Deric did a filing that was posted a few hours ago. Seems to be a change of address. I will be writing about it soon.

        MURT

        • PACER is your god
        • Posted May 24, 2017 at 9:56 pm
        • Permalink

        Murt – you are full of shit (to use a legal expression).

        You completely misunderstand what PACER is. Pleadings and such are submitted to the individual courts using the Federal Case Management / Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) system. PACER is the system whereby people not involved in that particular case can access the documents that have been filed.

        Lexis and everybody else gains access to these records through the PACER system, which charges a fee of 10 cents a page. These “affidavits” you have been posting from Olsen and Goddard amount to nothing until they have been filed through CM/ECF.

        The ONLY way you could get these documents is from Olsen and Goddard themselves, Murt, because these documents have NEVER been filed with the court. If they had been, they would be available on PACER for the whole world to see.

        So stop trying to be cute here.

        ECF 52 is the 4 page ‘affidavit’ of McKee, and that is it. There are no affidavits from Goddard or Olsen on file with this case. And if they are smart, they will keep it that way as nothing good can come from anything those two people have to say here. Just STFU and let the judge do his job and wait and see what happens.

          • MURTWITNESSONE
          • Posted May 25, 2017 at 1:45 am
          • Permalink

          I really do not understand why you keep visiting this blog. It is relatively small and only reaches a limited number of people. Again, there are multiple sources for obtaining documents that have been submitted to either the clerk of the court or to an officer of the court.

          I am not going to debate where the filings came from with you. You seem to have reached a conclusion so I guess you can stick with that.

          It is not going to make any difference if they file various documents or not. The decision will be made by the judge regardless of any paperwork filed. I would suspect that sometime soon the case will be dismissed outright and people will move on with their lives.
          I have been told by an officer of the court that the filings serve the purpose of the various parties stipulating certain facts as they know them and advocating their various viewpoints. The Olsen and Goddard arguments were to answer the claims of McKee. As far as I know, McKee has not made any further comments to the court or submissions to her atty.

          It might also help if you were a bit more polite in your postings. You sound like a spoiled brat throwing a temper tantrum.

          MURT

            • A Vexatious Litigant
            • Posted May 25, 2017 at 7:26 pm
            • Permalink

            Say, dude. Why you get all butt-hurt when someone calls you out when you make an inaccurate statement?

            When you make statements about how the judicial process works that are plainly wrong, you should not be mad when someone tries to correct your misconceptions. Instead, you should reflect and reevaluate your opinions.

            I understand why Goddard and Olsen had a race to your doorstep in an effort to get their “version” of the “truth” out there and posted on your blogs with these silly “affidavits” that aren’t really affidavits in any legal sense. There is also a reason why none of them actually did file those ‘affidavits’ with the federal court (a fact that not even you can rationally dispute despite your claim that these were filed in court).

            Some people prefer to litigate their lawsuits on Twitter, on Facebook, and on blogs and they think that “evidence” found on the internet is Evidence that can be used in a court, and that “something some guy said on the internet” will be of vital interest to the federal judge handling the case, especially when it is written in ALL CAPS. Those people are called “losers” (to use a technical, legal term) because in doing so, they invariably end up losing their cases.

            People in the know, people who have been doing this shit for a long time and who are good at it, prefer to spend their time and energy litigating their cases in the only forum that matters – in an actual court of law before a real, live judge, not in Twitter Court!

            I do not know any of the people involved in this ‘dispute’. I only give a shit about seeing Lostutter (and his employer McGibney) crushed and utterly destroyed. Once this case in NC gets done, and hopefully Lostutter ends up being sanctioned, then y’all can go back to throwing rocks at each other on the Twitter machine or whatever. I will stop caring. But until then, please do not rock the boat by trying your hand at lawfare when it is patently obvious that NONE of you are qualified. Let your attorney do his job and let the judge do his job, and then wait for all the lulz once you win!

          • Shannon
          • Posted May 25, 2017 at 11:52 pm
          • Permalink

          They were and are on Pacer. I saw them.

          • Shannon
          • Posted May 25, 2017 at 11:52 pm
          • Permalink

          The document number is on top.

            • A Vexatious Litigant
            • Posted May 26, 2017 at 10:06 am
            • Permalink

            Shannon, your version of PACER must be entirely different then my version of PACER. Please tell me what the specific ECF numbers are for the Olsen and Goddard affidavits.

            Without these documents having been filed with the court, the ONLY way Murt could get his hands on them is if they were sent to him by someone who had the documents originally to begin with. I don’t really give a shit about any of that. If Olsen wants to share his stuff, and if Goddard wants to share her stuff, I don’t care. But, Murt, don’t fucking sit here and tell me – and tell the world – that those documents were actually filed with the court when I god damn well know that they were not.

            • MURTWITNESSONE
            • Posted May 26, 2017 at 10:38 am
            • Permalink

            For someone who claims to know the court system, you do not comprehend how the process works. I did some additional checking and found that the documents were filed through their legal representative. If their lawyer did not go through whatever process it takes to get it on PACER than it is he that is holding things up. I do not know how Shannon found them but it seems that they are available to those who know how to look for them.

            As I said before, you seem intent on having me state that I got the things from one or more of the plaintiffs. I also said before that you are free to assume that. I simply do not understand why you keep covering this same ground. Not a thing has become of this lawsuit in quite some time and again it seems that nothing is going to become of it. Someday when the docket schedule catches up with it, the lawsuit will be summarily be dismissed and then you can find something else to complain about.

            MURT

            • PACER is your God
            • Posted May 26, 2017 at 9:07 pm
            • Permalink

            “I did some additional checking and found that the documents were filed through their legal representative.”

            Ah, I see what happened now. What we have here is a failure to communicate.

            You are using words that have specific legal meanings in ways that make no sense because you do not know how those words are supposed to be used. While I, as you reader, am thinking that you are meaning exactly what you say when you use those words in the manner that they are being used.

            The word “filed” has a very specific meaning, friend Murt. Handing something to your attorney is NOT the same thing as “filing” that document.

            Specifically, in law, filing is the act of submitting a document to the clerk of a court for the court’s immediate consideration and for storage in the court’s files. Me sitting at home, typing up an “affidavit” and then handing it off to my attorney or giving it to some guy to post on his blog is not the same thing as “submitting a document to the clerk of a court for the court’s immediate consideration and for storage in the court’s files.”

            Words have meaning, and when you use words you are unfamiliar with in ways that they should not be used, do not be upset if your better educated readers get confused and call you out on this.

            • MURTWITNESSONE
            • Posted May 27, 2017 at 1:04 am
            • Permalink

            Not sure what happened to my previous reply to this post. YOU are the only person that seems intent on determining the source of the documents I posted on my prior entries. The parties who filed the documents have not disputed that they made the comments and that they did submit the documents through their legal representative to the appropriate clerk of the court. I have no answer as to why you are the only person who is unable to get your own copies of the submissions. I posted them so that people would not have to go through the process of searching for them.

            MURT

    • Shannon
    • Posted May 21, 2017 at 7:05 am
    • Permalink

    Did the judge grant their lawyer to withdrawal? Are they res presenting themselves?

      • MURTWITNESSONE
      • Posted May 21, 2017 at 10:51 am
      • Permalink

      The judge has yet to rule on the lawyer’s motion. Federal courts are slow on “low priority” cases. Until the judge rules, the lawyer still represents them although, from what I understand, he has stopped doing anything on their behalf. He is only representing Michelle McKee for the limited purpose of procuring funds to pay her portion of the legal expenses.

      MURT

      • Thomas Olsen
      • Posted May 21, 2017 at 4:36 pm
      • Permalink

      We are currently in the process of talking to a few lawyers in North Carolina that are interested, including one that has successfully litigated against Lostutter before.

    • Shannon
    • Posted May 20, 2017 at 11:31 am
    • Permalink

    If Goddard & Olsen didn’t file their responses then how did you get a copy, Murt?

      • MURTWITNESSONE
      • Posted May 20, 2017 at 6:18 pm
      • Permalink

      I have sources other than PACER which is a cost to use service.

      MURT

        • Shannon
        • Posted May 21, 2017 at 6:59 am
        • Permalink

        Them affidavits are on Pacer.


Comments are closed.