The 1st let­ter in this set, dated March 11, 2024, spelled out to Christine Long that she was incompetent and faced embarrassment if she didn't STFU and GTFO. Was this a fair assessment? Judge for yourself. To read or down­load the 1st let­ter in PDF format, click here.

A few weeks later, Christine Long unexpectedly notified one of my attorneys, Douglas Vining, that she and her clients had decided to cave. This was ap­par­ent­ly verbal in a phone call but I'm not sure.

I responded to Christine in a 2nd let­ter dated April 11, 2024. This was one month to the day after the first let­ter. The 2nd let­ter was hand­ed by a pro­cess server to a man who give his name as Raul or simi­lar spelling.

Raul is be­lieved to be Raul Silva, who is be­lieved to be Christine Long's sig­ni­fi­cant other, but none of this is con­firm­ed. None of this is, either, to use Christine's words, “intimate personal secrets.” Raul's in­volve­ment, for example, is in pro­cess server records. As other things will be in Court records and consequently in Google if Christine chooses to drag this out.

To read or down­load the 2nd let­ter in PDF form, click here.

More weeks passed. Christine then demanded to know if I was going to agree to set­tle. She didn't seem to have read the 2nd let­ter. So, a pro­cess server delivered a 3rd let­ter on my behalf. The 3rd let­ter is sim­ple, but I gather that Christine lacks the 5th Grade skills need­ed to under­stand it.

To read or down­load the 3rd let­ter in PDF form, click here.

Notes after February 08, 2024 hearing:

1) Well, *that* was weird.

On Thursday, February 08, 2024, I went in per­son to Court for the 4th and final time in the WVRO cases since October 2023. This was the big one.

In Jan­uary, we did direct exam of me and argued a fees motion. Today was to be finishing direct exam, letting Christine Long cross-exam me, and then hopefully finding out the end of this part of the story.

Direct exam, which I large­ly wrote myself, more or less erased Christine Long's case against me. To come back, she need­ed to do a decent job of cross-exam and somehow create the impression of workplace and violence with­out the use of any actual al­le­ga­tions or evi­dence.

She wasn't up to it. Neither my primary WVRO attorney nor I have ever seen any­thing like it. Long is polished if you ques­tion her. She just makes sh*t up and says it with a straight face. But... God, what a klutz in cross-exam.

The Court ruled for me on the WVRO, on the second WVRO, and on the fees motion, and even tried to discourage Long from pursuing a CHRO, which she'd threatened to use as a fallback option.

I'm not out of the woods. Long still has a defamation action. But, really, it's time for her to slither away.

It's time, too, for the next formal update of this web­site. I'll need to post more about the hearings and put the scattered bits and pieces of the web­site into their proper places. Ideally this should be done in March.

2) To read the Mark Hashimi divorce papers, use the link be­low. The papers confirm that I had a rea­son to be­lieve Mark Hashimi and Campos were divorced and therefore a rea­son to be­lieve Campos would be interested in com­mun­i­ca­tion.

Click here for Hashimi-Campos divorce papers

Update: I forgot to mention that -- if I re­mem­ber correctly -- Ms. Campos cited a fear that Kamal Sayed Hashimi aka Mark Hashimi was going to steal her money as one of her primary concerns. I'm falling asleep but I'll double-check this soon.

3) Here is a link to Sam Pawar's orig­inal state­ment, not an edit by me. Sam wrote it long be­fore he met me and I can show each mail ser­ver that it traversed to get from him to me:

Click here for aflong23.pdf

One take-away is that Sam seems to be claiming that “Mark” is as racist as Naqib Halimi is and has boasted about hate speech towards a Black. Read the state­ment and tell me if I'm interpreting it right. I'm assuming that “GM” means the General Manager aka Kamal Sayed Hashimi.

"aflong" is short for "awkward for Long".

4) “Mark” Hashimi has said that sales license photos I'd post­ed proved I'd visited his deal­er­ship in per­son. I.e., he said, I must have photo'd the photos. So, here's the email in which Sam Pawar, who “Mark” pretends to have forgotten, sent me the license photos:

Click here for aflong22.pdf

5) Christine Long lied on the stand in November. She suggested that Sam Pawar had tearfully begged her to make me stop saying bad things about that nice company Fremont-Toyota. But, wait, as the infomercials used to say, there's more. I've found the videos that Sam made two years ago. Here's a video in which Sam Pawar accuses Fremont-Toyota of “millions and millions” of dollars in fraud.

If the MP4 doesn't play for you, please let me know. Or try the MOV instead but that copy might only work on phones.

Click here for aflong22.mp4

Click here for aflong22.mov

For more videos, see the new videos page at this link.

6) In one more odd part, on November 28, 2023, Christine Long went after my most obscure exhibit with an attack that was difficult to fol­low. She seemed to be alleging that the exhibit had been faked.

Long's focus on such a minor exhibit has led me to reassess its importance. Here is a screen­shot version, one that can be proved to be genuine:

Brian Martin didn't even say who “she” is here. And “she” and Brian didn't want to talk publicly about why, exactly, Brian felt that he'd be “f*cked” if he talked about the conversation.

So, this exhibit probably couldn't have been used despite its potential significance.

However, Christine Long wants to make an issue of these text messages now. So, as this is Ms. Long's decision, the “she” in the messages, according to Brian Martin, is Rachel Ghiringhelli, an ex-employee of Fremont-Toyota. I've ex­plain­ed elsewhere what Brian said that Rachel's call to him was about.

I didn't be­lieve Rachel G.'s al­le­ga­tions against “Mark” Hashimi for 1.5 years. I'm not sure that I be­lieve any of it now. But I'm starting to wonder if the energy and money that the other side is pouring into a quest for a gag order is about more than one thing.

7) We'll come back to the other parts. Lots of oddness to go around. They're ap­par­ent­ly going to focus on the fact that I contacted “Mark” Hashimi's wife. But I'd thought that Mark Hashimi and Ms. Campos had divorced. There was a divorce action.

This is public in­for­ma­tion. To down­load the divorce papers, use the link below:

Click here for Hashimi-Campos divorce papers

They're trying for a lifetime gag order.

This is gagorder.legal  aka  abuseofprocess.net

Comments and ques­tions may be email­ed to:

bob@gagorder.legal   (or)   me@abuseofprocess.net

You can text me at: 650-629-5185
24 hours is fine, but voicemail hasn't been set up.

I'm old and autistic. I've work­ed with code and data since 1978. I've finished suc­cess­ful projects for the DTIC, UK-NCIS after 9/11, and the military through Northrop-Grumman. I was the lead de­vel­op­er for 1/2 of the U.S. Vote one year. Actually, I was probably the sole develop­er that year.

Fremont-Toyota, an auto dealer, and Berliner-Cohen, a Big Law firm, hit me with three law­suits nearly two years ago. They're demand­ing a life­time gag order to bar me from saying the “names” of anybody in­volved.

The issues include ethnic hatred, mass fraud, adult-child sexual con­duct, an infant kid­nap­ping, autism, religion, and Fox TV's former Reality P.I. (who they also sued). It seems a little unusual.

They've said that Blacks and others are “smelly”. Ethnic hatred is wrong. But they say I'm the ethnic hatred per­son and I can't be allow­ed to talk about the legal cases.

The cases have continued for two years. Many peo­ple deal with worse things. I had one friend left from the past. 50 years ago. Somehow, I'm old now. Ron, Twisted Time, lived with level 10 pain for 15 years be­fore it took him. Man with no shoes meets man with no feet.

But, fear on a daily basis, legal bills to wipe out life savings, peo­ple who keep com­ing at you, spit­tle flying, two years of this in early old age. Sure, why not.

If some­thing happens to one per­son, that and 50 cents won't buy a news­paper. Do news­papers still exist? The part that I'd like peo­ple to care about is the gag order.

It isn't sup­posed to be pos­si­ble for peo­ple to be able to pull down the shades to hide things just be­cause they have money. I'm ask­ing readers to think about the impli­ca­tions of gag orders.

The text num­ber is, again: 650-629-5185

Regards, Robert (the Old Coder)

Here's the gag order:

Note: This is just one of two gag orders that attorney Christine Long is trying for. We'll docu­ment the other one when we see it.

First, Christine Long states:

“Respondents are not allowed to refer to Petitioners or their employees as rapists, Jihadis, muslim terror­ist, a terror­ist cell organi­za­tion, crime ring, Afghan terror­ists or other such hate speech.”

This might sound reason­able. However, it's just an attempt to set things up for the parts be­low that Christine Long hopes to sneak in. Most of what Christine is imply­ing here never hap­pen­ed.

I refer­red to attorney Christine Long of Berliner-Cohen herself as “a rapist of an attorney”. Nobody else. This was an assess­ment of Christine's own charac­ter and con­duct.

Christine Long is an attorney who other attorneys con­sid­er to be unethical. She's engaged in mul­ti­ple con­duct viola­tions. I'm entitled to hold the opin­ion that I've stated and to be­lieve that others will agree with the use of the word “rapist”.

More importantly, Christine Long's clients at Fremont-Toyota engaged in hate speech against minor­ities such as “Mother F*cker you can't call us brother be­cause you aren't Muslim”.

The “you aren't Muslim” state­ment, by the way, was made by a client of Christine's named Naqib U. Halimi. You can see a reference to Mr. Halimi's state­ment in the EEOC complaint at this link.

The “you aren't Muslim” state­ment is, in and of it­self, one of the defin­i­tions of Jihadi. See Simple Wiki­pedia at this link. Note: Christine Long has mis-cited quotes from Wiki­pedia as the basis for a num­ber of alle­ga­tions against me.

Christine Long is the attorney for a hate-speech group. But she hopes to turn around that allega­tion by mis-citing my use of a word that I used accur­ate­ly in context.

Nothing else that Christine Long refers to in the demand pasted further up is cited accur­ate­ly.

Christine Long of Berliner-Cohen goes on to demand:

“Respondent is not allowed to publish on any web­site or in any manner the personal informa­tion of Peti­tion­ers or their employees includ­ing their home address, personal phone num­bers, personal emails, names of rela­tions and children, social security num­bers or any other identi­fy­ing infor­ma­tion.”

This might sound reason­able as well. However, note the part about “any other identify­ing infor­ma­tion”. This would include names.

Long has demanded for a year that I agree never to state the “names” of anybody on her side. The goal is to prevent me from wri­ting about these cases or even mentioning the mass fraud and hate speech at Fremont-Toyota.

This is actu­al­ly impos­si­ble to order be­cause I can't be pre­vent­ed from dis­trib­u­ting the plead­ings. Even if that is pos­sible, I can dis­tribute the gag order it­self.

A book about these cases is going to be com­pleted. I don't be­lieve it can be stopped. However, Chris­tine Long of Berliner Cohen is well-funded. She'll pull out all of the stops.

If a gag order of this type is issued, I'll dis­trib­ute the gag order it­self and work things out from there. But Long will then try to put me in jail for do­ing what I'll still have a right to do.

Finally, the proposed gag order includes this paragraph:

“Respondent is allowed to post on web­sites that do not mislead the public as to the author or origin facts rela­ting to Mr. Martin's pur­chase of a vehicle or other matters, so long as the post­ings do not con­tain any defam­a­tory state­ments, invade privacy rights, and use name and like­ness of Petitioners' employees.”

Long is asking the Court here to block, a priori, any state­ments about mass fraud and hatred of minor­ities and Long's own con­duct violations. The re­sponse of attorneys who have com­ment­ed so far is “Nope”.

Additionally, the cases aren't about P.I. Brian Martin's state­ment.

The cases are about the state­ment that Christine Long is trying to block right in the part quoted above, the state­ment of an ex-employee named Sam Pawar who came for­ward to tell the truth about hate speech at Fremont-Toyota in Fremont, CA.

I'd like my life back after two years. My health isn't ideal. I'd like to be use­ful in the years that are left. But these peo­ple won't go away no mat­ter what I agree to.

They're going to try to seize the last of my life savings in Decem­ber. The idea is that I'm not sup­posed to be able to afford Internet to write about this.

Your advice is request­ed.

History of the Cases:

01) In Decem­ber 2020, a P.I. named Brian Martin bought a truck from Fremont-Toyota in the S.F. Bay Area.

02) The P.I. suspected fraud. He asked me to look into it. I found fraud. In mid-2021, I post­ed the P.I.'s statement online. The deal­er­ship ignored that.

03) In Decem­ber 2021, one of Fremont-Toyota's ex-employees, Sam Pawar, came for­ward. Sam reported mass fraud and ethnic hatred. He'd filed an EEOC complaint.

04) I posted Sam's statement online. Fremont-Toyota immediately sued Brian and me for allegedly planning to kill its employees.

05) An ex-employee named Rachel Ghiringhelli then phoned Brian Martin. Rachel talked for half an hour about sexual harass­ment by the dealer­ship's general mana­ger Mark Hashimi. Brian and I didn't know what to make of this.

06) I hadn't been served. We only knew about the action against Brian. So, I wrote to the other side to argue that there was no case.

07) They filed two more lawsuits against me. This was in Winter 2022.

08) They're pretending that Sam Pawar doesn't exist; that this is only about Brian Martin's truck purchase. But they threatened Sam Pawar for months. They made a deal with Sam's attorney. Sam was ordered to sign a pre-writ­ten false statement, but he refused.

09) Opposing Counsel Christine Long has misused an infant kidnapping and adult-child sexual situation as part of all of this.

10) The demand is that I be gagged for a lifetime. They can actu­al­ly do that in 1 of the 3 cases.

These are the key pieces:

More pages:

These supplemental links offer a deeper dive. Note: When you visit these pages, more links will appear at the top of the pages.