Liberi v Taitz Affidavit of K Strebel Exhibit 3

8/8/2019 Liberi v Taitz Affidavit of K Strebel Exhibit 3

1/20


2/20

Affidavit of K. Strebel 10/5/2010 1

Law Offices of:PHILIP J. BERG, ESQUIRE555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531 Attorney for: PlaintiffsIdentification No. 09867(610) 825-3134

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

LISA LIBERI, et al,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

ORLY TAITZ, et al,

Defendants.

::::::::

::::

Assigned to Honorable Eduardo C. Robreno

Case No.: 09-cv-01898-ECR

AFFIDAVIT OF K. STREBEL.

I, K. Strebel am over the age of eighteen (18) and not a party to the within action. I have

personal knowledge of the facts herein and if called to do so, I could and would competently

testify under oath.

I declare as follows:

1. Again your honor I lead off with the quote from page 19 of the August 7th, 2009

hearing. Mr. Berg was asking your honor to rule that the Plaintiffs and their witness did not have

to disclose their full names and addresses. Your Honor ruled to protect the parties. I am quoting

from page 19 of the August 7th

, Hearing Transcript what occurred after Mr. Bergs requests.

August 7, 2009 Hearing Transcript Page 19, Lines 2-16

The Court: Well, we know who she is. How are you going to be able to denythat? She doesnt have to disclose her social security number?

Case 2:09-cv-01898-ER Document 146-5 Filed 10/07/10 Page 2 of 20


3/20


Mr. Berg: No, but her actual address I think would be detrimental.

The Court: Well, the actual address we could do without it.

Mr. Berg: Okay. Could that be on other people, too, or just on Ms. Liberi?

The Court: Well, you could disclose it and file it with the Court under seal.

Mr. Berg: Thank you. With all of my witnesses today?

The Court: Yes

2. With that said, it amazes me that Defendant Taitz continues to promote that Lisa

Liberi produced a PA Drivers license when in fact Defendant Taitz was not present at the

Hearing so she would have no clue as to what was presented to Your Honor and she continues to

mention the presents of the Defendants, Ed and Caren Hale. At the time that Lisa Liberi

presented the documents that I attested to in my last Affidavit to this court, Defendant's Ed and

Caren Hale had the chance to either ask the court for verification of some sort or object to the

documents provided under seal, which they did not. The only objection in the August 7th 2009

Transcript before the discussion of providing addresses under seal came from Defendant Hale at

page 16, line 20. Where the discussion was about the disclosure of Ron Pollarik aka Ron Polland

and how his identity was made known by Defendants Belcher and Hale. Further Defendant Taitz

continues her persistent dramatization for Lisa Liberi's Drivers License impugning the integrity

of this court that witnessed these documents. I also would add that the Hale defendants acted as

Pro Se and this court allowed them a wider range of opportunity as Pro Se. Again I state at no

time did anyone state or testify to the state of issuance of Plaintiff Liberi's Drivers License.

3. I have sent to Plaintiff Liberi and received from Plaintiff Liberi packages, which I

can confirm they never came from or shipped to Texas or California.

4. Again, I state Plaintiff Lisa Liberi and her son are victims of Domestic Violence

type crimes from one John Mark Allen, father of Lisa Liberi's son. When Defendant Orly Taitz



4/20


stated that she and Neil Sankey, had received the Family Picture of Plaintiff Lisa Liberi's family

picture from a convicted Criminal one John Mark Allen, This was obtained from Defendant

Taitzs own filings with this Court and posted all over the Internet by Defendant Taitz.

John Mark Allen (1956) lives close to Taitz in South Orange County, CAConvicted of burglary of Lisa Liberis home Protective Orders for stalking Lisa Liberi

and violence against son. Lisa Liberi was placed in the safe at home project, given a

confidential address and new SSN. Defendants Orly Taitz and Neil Sankey sought outJohn Mark Allen, gave the personal information of Lisa Liberi to him, knowing Lisa

Liberi was protected from this man, as it was plead in the Complaint against the

Defendants

5. A protective order was in place when Defendant Taitz obtained this picture thus

Mr. Allen was indeed in violation of the protective order. And by him providing this picture also

makes it possible for crimes to be further committed by anyone seeking out Plaintiff Liberi or her

family. Since Neil Sankey stated that they were going to make this case go away and that Taitz

has stated she was "Going to take Philip J. Berg and his Law Firm "down" and to do so she

stated she was going to destroy Lisa Liberi and get rid of her." One would think that if you

are a previous Victim of Domestic Violence and it comes from your EX Boyfriend and he is

now supplying a family picture of Lisa Liberi and her family to Defendants Taitz and Sankey,

anyone would have concern for their life or safety of their family. Defendant Taitz aided in the

crime of violating the protective order when she first asked John Allen for the Picture and Aided

John Allen in the cyber crimes he committed when he would have had to hack into Lisa Liberi's

personal computer as this picture was never given to anyone and no one within the Liberi

household gave the picture to John Allen and the picture was only on the personal computer of

Plaintiff Liberi. If John Allen were to deny obtaining this picture from Plaintiff Liberi's personal

computer, then Defendant Taitz claim to this court that she received the picture from John Allen

is a Lie to this court. Further should John Allen claim he never gave the picture to Defendant



5/20


Taitz then she and or possibly her husband Yosef Taitz would be likely to be the one's

committing Cyber Crimes by hacking into Liberi's Personal computer. A private investigator was

hired to make contact with John Mark Allen to verify just where he obtained this photo. I have

personal knowledge of this as I assisted in locating a Private Investigator in Orange County,

California. The Private Investigator made the attempt to contact John Allen at his place of

employment, however John Allen avoided the P.I. and never came out to answer questions. Mr.

Allen did however contact Defendant Taitz about it, which was filed with this Court by the

Plaintiffs; it was Defendant Taitz who sent email to Mr. Berg for verification of this attempted

contact by the PI. In addition, Defendant Taitz harassed the Private Investigator and his staff.

John Allen is not a witness as of yet since he has not provided an affidavit or statement to this

court and has not submitted to a deposition to the facts presented by Defendant Taitz. Further

should he acknowledge giving the family photo to Defendant Taitz then he acknowledges having

violated a restraining order. We have no way of knowing if John Allen actually provided the

picture, as Defendant Taitzs has blocked and hampered with having Mr. Allen interviewed.

6. On page 4 of Defendant Taitz reply she makes the claim "however they did not

provide a scintilla of evidence to show that Taitz or anybody else did anything to threaten them

or harm them." Again a further fabrication to distort the facts. Taitz has published millions of

times from her own websites, RSS feeds etc, and further encouraged others to publish her

continued attacks on Lisa Liberi and the other Plaintiff's by publishing Lisa Liberi's Social

Security number, Mother's Maiden Name, Date and Place of Birth, address by which she

believes Liberi resides and Phone # she believes to be that of Lisa Liberi and other personal

Information. All information used to steal ones identity and also to cause people to make calls to

your home with no purpose other than to harass an individual or their family. Further Linda



6/20


Belcher published such information in her own Affidavit of the Address by which she believes

Liberi resides and the phone # she believes to be that of Liberi. Further Defendant Ed hale posted

the family picture of Lisa Liberi on his website with the caption " Do you know who this is,

someone sent this to me and I dont know who it is" he obtained the picture from Defendant

Taitz.

7. Further let us go back to my Affidavit of July 6th

, 2010 where on pages 16 & 17 I

quote Defendant Ed Hale "Yeah and I'm gonna to tell you something, when these affidavits come

in that they claim that they have. These people's names are gonna be known. Their addresses are

gonna be known. And you know something, we are gonna know who they are. And you know

what, we will go after them with a vengeance..." Words and threats are just as compelling as the

actions. If this were not so then even the Secret Service of the United States would not have to

investigate verbal threats against the President of the United States.

8. Neil Sankey has taken liberties with website publications and altering documents

supplied to Defendant Taitz, and Defendant Belcher has altered (forged) the chat log and email

in Plaintiff Liberis name, presented as evidence in this case which is a fraud upon the court.

9. After the posting of plaintiff Liberi's Social Security number by Defendant Taitz,

a Sholanda Nash began using Plaintiff Liberi's Social Security number in Harris County, Texas.

Defendant Taitz has called for someone to kidnap Plaintiff Ostellas children in retaliation for

Plaintiff Ostella bringing action against her. See Ostella's affidavit previously filed with this

court. Defendant Taitz also calls for the "Purging of Obama and his clique" and labeled the

Plaintiffs as President Obamas clique evidence of which has been filed with this court. In the

Websters Dictionary, the word purge in a political sense as used by Defendant Taitz, means to

kill.



7/20


10. I also stated in my affidavit that on June 27 that Defendant Taitz posted on her

website www.orlytaitzesq.com about the death of Plaintiff Liberi's sister who died from a drug

overdose. From page 17 of my July 6th, 2009 Affidavit, "Ms. Taitz posted this article on June

27, 2009 titled I am back from PA. Very Important. This post is horrible and is regarding Lisa

Liberis sister who died of a drug overdose. Ms. Taitz infers that Lisa Liberi placed a hit or a

contract on her own sister. Ms. Taitz makes accusations in the same post that a drug overdose

may be self inflicted or inflicted by someone else. Ms. Taitz further ensues that problems with

her own car could be caused by Lisa Liberi and talks about a hit being put out by Lisa Liberi

on an Attorney, meaning herself, or her family. Ms. Taitz has again posted the names of

Detectives and DAs and contacts Phone numbers for people visiting her website to try and get

the Police involved in areas of her concocted falsified accusations. I fail to see where anything

regarding Lisa Liberis sister or her death has anything to do with Ms. Taitz or gives Ms. Taitz

any reason to post this painful and private information of Lisa Liberis sister on her website at

www.orlytaitzesq.com. Ms. Taitz simply did this to hurt and harm Lisa Liberi and her family.

This was cruel, malicious and extremely vindictive on the part of Orly Taitz.

11. Plaintiff Liberi was not able to obtain further funding in her or her husband's

name for her son's schooling because of the identity theft that occurred after Defendant Taitz

posted the vital information of Plaintiff Liberi on her website and forwarded it through other

websites and RSS feeds etc.

12. Taitz also threatened to take Philip J. Berg and his Law Firm "down" and to do so

she stated she was going to destroy Lisa Liberi and get rid of her. This most certainly

constitutes Threat and Harm. Your Honor again these threats amount to a clear violation

of State and Federal Laws pertaining to cyber-stalking, harassment, threatening of



8/20


witnesses; is interfering with witnesses and witness tampering. Cyber-stalking, harassment,

all of which are criminal offenses.

13. I still have concerns for my own safety and that of my family. I state this because

it appears that by Taitz own postings that she and the other defendants have no problem with

illegally running background reports, illegally pulling credit reports and posting anything about

anyone. Defendant Taitz shows this because she has even and still to this day continues posting

14. Defendant Taitz was ordered at the June 25th 2009 hearing to not publish

anyone's Social Security number. I have personal knowledge of this as I listened to the Courts

proceedings on C.D. and it has been filed in Court numerous times. Your Honor you also

cautioned Defendant Taitz on her publication of Plaintiff Liberi's Social security # and other

private and personal and confidential information. Your Honor stated that if the behaviors

continued it would weigh heavily in favor of the Plaintiff's and there was no permissible purpose

to post Social Security numbers. Because of the continued actions by Defendant Taitz and the

other Defendants, for the safety and protection of the Plaintiffs, the time is now Your Honor.

15. Taitz attempted to hire or pay Ruben Nieto as he attempted to receive payment

from Defendant Taitz with 3 simultaneous money requests, one in the amount of $9,000 and two

(2) in the amount of $8,000, totaling $25,000.00 on two (2) separate occasions, May 25, 2009

and May 29, 2009. Interesting the amounts being requested were each under $10,000, under the

limits of reporting pursuant to the Patriot Act. Ruben Nieto, according to Court Records, was

convicted of Aggravated Assault. It is believed Defendant Taitz was hiring Ruben Nieto to harm

Plaintiffs Liberi, Ostella and their families. It is unknown whether or not Defendant Taitz made

payment to Nieto or not. It does question why 3 separate withdrawals would be asked for within

the Social Security number of Barack Obama.



9/20


4 days and under the amount of $10,000 dollars. Was it that Defendant Taitz was indeed hiring a

hitman herself and is why she has been falsely accusing Liberi of doing? Proofs of the attempted

withdrawals by Ruben Nieto are on file with this Court. Or, is it that Taitz is giving him donated

money for no apparent reason at all in the amount of $25,000 to avoid the Patriot Act tracking

and the IRS. (Again, as stated numerous times to this Court, Defendant Taitzs projects.

What ever laws Taitz is breaking or what ever scam Taitz is concocting, she blames her

victims of)

16. Defendant Taitz further implies on Page 8 & 9 of her reply "Shirley Waddell is

Liberi's mother who is clearly biased and who does not want her daughter to go back to prison.

Her affidavit appears to be very similar to multiple prior affidavits of Liberi and Strebel and

appeared to be either penned by Berg or Liberi."I have provided my own affidavits to this court

and am fully aware of what I have stated. Plaintiff Liberis mother and I have been watching all

of the events from the beginning, as have many other individuals.

17. Defendant Taitz makes the claim that I am an unemployed Truck Driver. I never

made the claim anywhere that I was unemployed. For Taitz to know that I am unemployed

would require a background check on me. I only stated that I was on Work Release and was

confined to my home. This would suggest or indicate that Defendant Taitz may again had a

background check done on me without any type of permissible purpose other than to destroy

another individual. Defendant Taitz further claims that I "witnessed nothing and have no

evidence of any act by Taitz to harm Liberi or anyone else." I have witnessed the events, and I

have supplied many pages of evidence of Defendant Taitz and the other defendants in several

affidavits presented to this court from Taitz own words and websites. I also provided evidence

where Defendant Taitz continued to deceive her supporters by not telling them that her sanctions



10/20


had been paid in the amount of $ 20.000 to the U.S. District Court, Middle District of Georgia.

Defendant Taitz is telling her supporters how much more she needs to collect to pay her

sanctions rather than the stating the sanctions have been paid. This is a deceptive practice just as

she continues to do with this court. The evidence submitted in this case are Defendant Taitzs

own writing and from Defendant Taitz own website which she controls the posting on and often

times is the only poster on her website.

18. Defendant Taitz again fails to acknowledge that she violated the laws when she

intentionally ensured Plaintiff Liberi's I.D. would be stolen causing harm to Plaintiff Liberis

credit and her livelihood, as well as to the livelihood of Plaintiff Ostella and her family.

19. An affidavit provided by a previous lover of Defendant Taitz, Charles Edward Lincoln,

III, filed with this court provided proof that Taitz and her adulterous lover at the time, Charles

Edward Lincoln III, did drive around the area in which Plaintiff Ostella resides and where

Plaintiff Ostellas children attend school, and in the course of that drive stopped at several police

stations in an effort to have Plaintiff Ostella arrested on false charges that Taitz concocted.

20. Further at no time did I or anyone else state, mention or disclose where Plaintiff

Liberis license was issued from or where Plaintiff Liberi resides, as Defendant Taitz continues

falsely asserting.

21. On page 9 of Taitzs September 28, 2010 filing, Taitz further goes on to say

"Taitz and John Allen have colluded to further bring harm to Lisa Liberi. Again he provided zero

evidence to substantiate such allegation." Again I have the statement of Defendant Taitz

herself, that she filed with this court, claiming she and Defendant Neil Sankey went to John

Allen and received the family photo of Plaintiff Liberi from John Allen and that John Allen



11/20


verified the photo to be that of Lisa Liberi and her family. At the time Taitz claims to have

received this photo, Plaintiff Liberi was under a protective order.

22. Let us review the statements made on page 10 of Defendant Taitz reply. Taitzs

states that I am an unemployed truck driver and have no legal training. To the contrary, I grew

up around Law Enforcement, have friends and relatives on several police forces, have a friend

who is a Paralegal with the State Attorney General's office and am able to research online several

of the laws that have been broken by the Defendants in this case. Has Defendant Taitz heard of

Taft, Findlaw or Cornell University who have the Laws (Law Library) on line? Has Defendant

Taitz ever used a Dictionary online? Dictionary.com is wonderful and is used for legal

definitions. Defendant Taitz or whomever "penned" her reply should read my affidavit again as

I clearly have shown where she is in violation of the law.

23. The statement made by Taitz "He attached some 100 pages of copies of Taitz web

site and claims that the fact that Taitz published pleadings of this case constitutes an obstruction

of justice, harassment and stalking. This is an insane argument."On the contrary, what is insane

is that Taitz in her Reply twisted the actual facts and what I said as well as the facts pertaining to

this case. What I stated in my 09/14/2010 Affidavit on page 6 Paragraph 10 is:

"In addition, as Im sure this Court may have noticed, the past few filings in this Court by

Defendant Orly Taitz that are filled with untruthful and false allegations, Defendant Taitz has

sent to Judge David O. Carter, and Chief Judge Audrey B. Collins of the U.S. District Court,

Central District of California, Southern Division for absolutely no permissible purpose, other

than to prejudice the Judges and/or to force the Judges in this District to recues themselves, as

this is the Court Your Honor Ordered transfer of the within matter to. This is documented on the

Certificate of Service on the filings made by Defendant Taitz. Defendant Taitzs actions interfere



12/20


with the proper administration of justice and therefore, constitutes criminal Obstruction of

Justice. The definition of Obstruction of Justice is the crime or act of willfully interfering

with the process of justice and law esp. by influencing, threatening, harming, or impeding a

witness, potential witness, juror, orjudicial or legal officer or by furnishing false information

in or otherwise impeding an investigation or legal process [emphasis added]

24. See Defendant Orly Taitzs Certificate of Service page, page 20 on file from her

reply, Orly Taitz again sends copies of her Reply to Motion filed September 28, 2010 to

Audrey B. Collins Chief Judge, US District Court, Central District of CA, Southern

Division and Judge David O. Carter, USDC Central District of CA, Southern Division.

These 2 Judges are located in the Court, Your Honor has transferred this case to. As I

previously stated, it is my understanding that cases are assigned in the Central District of CA,

Southern Division where this case is being transferred too, on a alpha split, with Judge Carter

assigned last name initials of J, K, L and at the current time this case has not been transferred

as of this date, however, will be transferred. Therefore Defendant Taitzs communications of

pleadings to the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, Southern Division or anyone

associated with the Central District of CA, Southern Division court, where Taitz does not have

any pending cases, and is only sending her falsified and fabricated stories in her pleadings to

prejudice the Judges and court against the Plaintiffs, is an obstruction of justice in an attempt

to interfere with the justice process. See 18 U.S.C 1505.

25. On the subject of Harassment, the definition of harassment is 1). to disturb

persistently; torment, as with troubles or cares; bother continually; pester; persecute. 2). to

trouble by repeated attacks, incursions, etc., as in war or hostilities; harry; raid. Posting of

Plaintiff Liberi's personal information including her Social Security number, family picture, and



13/20


a purported address and phone number with false statements and attacks over and over again

constitutes harassment and cyber-stalking. Driving around the neighborhood of Lisa Ostella and

seeking out Police officers to go make a false arrest constitutes harassment. Asking for someone

to kidnap the children of Plaintiff Ostella is harassment. Asking her supporters to dig up

information on Plaintiff Liberi and her husband, is harassment and cyber-stalking. Asking for

help from supporters in the areas where she believes Plaintiffs Liberi and Ostella reside

constitutes harassment and cyber-stalking. Continually accusing one of stealing funds from a

foundation without a single bit of truth over and over again is harassment and cyber-stalking.

Posting the family picture obtained illegally and Social Security Number over and over and

publishing it in Court pleadings not having anything to do with this case and in violation of the

ECF rules is harassment and cyber-stalking. Using the courts to further publicize this illegal

activity is harassment and cyber-stalking. Going on radio stations and making accusations is

harassment and cyber-stalking.

26. Taitzs newest filing on September 28, 2010 contains information supplied

supposedly by Geoff Staples is stolen material as he is the Owner of the company by which

this information was supplied without a subpoena, court order or notification to Mr. Berg. Geoff

Staples provided altered, forged and stolen documents to Defendant Taitz. These documents

have been faxed at least two (2) separate times, One (1) from Geoff Staples to Defendant Taitz

and (1) from Defendant Taitz to some unknown location. Use of a phone line across State lines

in connection with distributing altered, forged, and stolen information is a crime and considered

Wire Fraud. Use of the Internet to further send out forged, altered and stolen documents is a

Cyber Crime.



14/20


27. I have been for approximately 1-1/2 years and continue to be a Web

Administrator for Mr. Bergs website. Plaintiff Liberi has never handled any credit cards, and

she never had access to the donation accounts or servers which Mr. Bergs website and blog

were hosted.

28. Stalking, again, as explained in my previous Affidavit, is the act or crime of

willfully and repeatedly following or harassing another person in circumstances that would cause

a reasonable person to fear injury or death esp. because of express or implied threats; broadly a

crime of engaging in a course of conduct directed at a person that serves no legitimate purpose

and seriously alarms, annoys, or intimidates that person

1

And, the crime ofcyber-stalking is

using tactics that harass and threaten their victims, such as posting the victims name and

address on the Internet along with false claims.2.

29. Defendant Taitz threatened Plaintiffs Liberi, Osetlla and Berg. Defendant Taitz

has continually published Plaintiff Liberis Social Security number, date of birth, place of birth,

mothers maiden name, many false accusations, the address which Defendant Taitz believes is

Plaintiff Liberi's and Phone # she believes to be that of Plaintiff Liberi and now Plaintiff Liberis

family picture which Taitz illegally obtained. In these circumstances that would cause a

reasonable person to fear injury or death esp. because of express or implied threats; which is

broadly a crime of engaging in a course of conduct directed at a person that serves no legitimate

purpose and seriously alarms, annoys, or intimidates that person. False allegations about

1 http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/stalking (Legal Dictionary)

2 Wayne Petherick, Cyber-Stalking: Obsessional Pursuit and the Digital Criminal, The Crime Library, (cyber-

stalking is an extension of real world stalking in which electronic mediums such as the Internet are used to

pursue, harass or contact another in an unsolicited fashion). See i-safe America, Cyber Stalking.



15/20


Plaintiff Liberi, Ostella and Berg are continually filed with this Court and placed all over the

Internet by Defendant Taitz and the other Defendants.

30. Plaintiffs Liberi and Ostella are continually harassed, they receive death threats,

strange people have shown up at their homes, they live in fear daily.

31. Defendant Linda Belchers last Affidavit supplied to this court as Exhibit 3 in

Defendant Taitz filing is not to be considered as fact. The Notary in this document Cindy

Tschukart has signed this document without any Official Seal from the State of Texas where

Defendant Belcher lives. Further there is no expiration of the Notary's commission and no listing

from which County or State of where this document was supposedly notarized. There is no

way to verify this Notary to ensure her stamp was not stolen or forged. Therefore it this is not an

official Notary for the State of Texas and Defendant Taitz as a licensed Attorney had a fiduciary

duty to make sure this Affidavit complied with the laws when filing the document as genuine.

32. It is no secret that Defendant Taitz has submitted copies of forged Birth

Authentic, yet they have been found to be forgeries. It is also no secret that Defendant Taitzs

own witness in another case, even stated that Taitz husband, Yosef Taitz, may have created the

forged Birth Certificate filed by Taitz in Judge David O. Carters court

33. Letter from Geoff Staples Exhibit # 2 in Defendant Taitz Reply is nothing more

than a fraud upon this court. First of all there is no Affidavit attached to the supplied information

by Geoff Staples. The information by him is obtained or produced illegally, as he was the former

WebMaster and Host for the Obamacrimes.com Website. In his position he had access to all

factors as it relates to the Website. Mr. Staples was under a legal obligation at the time he was

fired from his position to turn over any and all documentation or remove it in its entirety from his

Certificates of several kinds and illustration claiming them to be that of Barack Obama and being



16/20


own systems and servers all information pertaining to Mr. Bergs supporters, and to turn over

any and all access passwords to the owner of the website, which is Mr. Berg.

34. As a web Administrator, I am obligated, should I leave a site, to not continue

using my access or to lock others out of the access to the website or donation areas or to server

access so that the next person to take my place can access the site properly and not have to worry

about my further intrusion.

35. It would appear that not only are these documents forged, they are a perpetrated

fraud upon the court, but also that it could be that Geoff Staples still had Administrative access to

pull whatever information he needed to send to Defendant Taitz. The information supplied to

Defendant Taitz in these pages brings harm to two individuals not related to this case but now

may find themselves injeopardy of identity theft. Defendant Taitz with the aid of Geoff Staples

and likely Defendant Belcher as she was the person who first introduced Geoff Staples to

Plaintiff Berg has now breached Mr. Bergs supporters private information and credit data. It is

my understanding that Plaintiff Berg is notifying the parties whose information was breached by

Geoff Staples, Linda Belcher and Orly Taitz of the illegal distribution of their personal

information.

36. Your Honor, Geoff Staples used his position as a Webmaster and a Hosting

Company through his business, Hostricity to steal private data of Mr. Bergs supporters who

have donated to Mr. Berg. Defendant Taitz then intentionally posted the information of Mr.

Bergs supporters who made donations to further harm Mr. Bergs law practice. As a Web

Administrator this is very concerning to me because it is unknown how many other supporters of

Mr. Bergs, who made donations, private information and credit data was turned over to

Defendant Taitz by Geoff Staples.



17/20


37. Another problem I have come across with the filing of Defendant Taitzs and the

documents supplied by Geoff Staples is the fact, the documents have been altered and forged,

illegally inputting Plaintiff Liberis email address, to depict that Plaintiff Liberi sent the email.

With Defendant Taitzs past history of filing forged documents in this Case as well as other

Courts and Defendant Taitz seeking of perjured testimony, this is no surprise to me to see that

Plaintiff Liberis email address has again been forged.

38. It has been filed with and shown to this court, Defendant Belchers forged Plaintiff

Liberis email address, [email protected], on a chat log and emails; Defendants Taitz and

Sankey alterations of Website information and blog articles; Defendants Sankey and Taitz

altered/forged Plaintiff Ostellas emails and email address; and now we have documents with

Plaintiff Liberis email address forged on documents from Geoff Staples that Defendant Taitz

has filed with Your Honors Court, as accurate..

39. The problems with these attachments from Taitzs September 28, 2010 filing is

that Geoff Staples or Defendant Taitz shows Plaintiff Liberi's Email as coming from the email

address of [email protected], however when I go back and look at every email that came to me

from Plaintiff Liberi's AOL account it comes in as [email protected]. Geoff Staples email

shows it coming in as [email protected]. The email has been altered and Plaintiff Liberi's

email address has been illegally inputted. Plaintiff Liberis email address on all the emails she

has ever sent me comes in as two (2) lowercase (ll's) while Geoff Staples shows her email

coming in with a Capital (L) followed by a lower case (l). When you sign up for AOL or any

other email address, it presets the appearance of your email. And, Plaintiff Liberis email is

preset as [email protected] not [email protected].



18/20


40. Further the Date time stamp on Geoff Staples pages filed by Taitz, shows the Day

of the week first, the Date, Month and Year, which reflects Military Date/Time not Standard

Date/Time. Now all of the emails I have ever received from Plaintiff Liberis AOL email

address, which is tons, come into me with the day of the week, the month, the date, and year in

standard time, e.g. Mon, the Month, date, the Year, the time and either am or pm, e.g. Mon,

Oct 4, 2010 3:19 pm, which is Standard time and no indication of EST ( Eastern Standard Time)

MST ( Mountain Standard Time) etc, just am or pm. Not Military Time. This indicates the

email information has been altered and changed and Plaintiff Liberis email address was illegally

added and could not have come from Plaintiff Liberi.

41. Whenever any person sends an email, there is header information which shows

where the email was sent from, the date, time, and subject, the path through the email service;

who the email was sent to and the path through the receivers email service. There is header

information on the pages purported to be from Plaintiff Liberi, filed by Defendant Taitz. These

are clear forgeries. The emails did not come from [email protected], Plaintiff Liberis AOL

email address. Instead, Taitz or Geoff Staples illegally inputted (altered/forged) Plaintiff Liberis

email to deceive people and this Court into thinking that Plaintiff Liberi sent the email. The

header information with each email does not show Plaintiff Liberis email address as it would

had Plaintiff Liberi really sent the email from her email address, [email protected]. Instead, it

shows Geoff Staples email address as sending the email to other email addresses, Plaintiff

Liberis email address appears no where in the header information supplied and filed by Taitz

and Geoff Staples.

42. The fourteen pages filed by Defendant Taitz are forged and altered and therefore

cannot be authenticated.



19/20


43. Your Honor this further outlines why the TRO should be in place. Not only to

stop the Defendants from forging documents with the Plaintiffs names and email address, but

Parties now outside of this lawsuit are now being hurt without their knowledge and it is now

taking time to notify Law Enforcement of these crimes recently committed by Geoff Staples and

Defendant Taitz. It further breaches what would be confidentiality between the Donors to

Obamacrimes.com and Mr. Berg as they have a right to privacy and their Constitutional rights

are now being violated By Defendant Taitz and Geoff Staples. Should this court choose not to

issue a restraining order against the defendants then it should be aware that Defendant Taitz will

continue her illegal acts, which are causing severe damages.

44. In addition to the above-mentioned crimes, Defendant Taitz is also guilty of

additional Crimes as it relates to Geoff Staples. Taitz is now in receipt of stolen property by her

own admission by filing stolen and forged information with this court. These continued crimes

of Taitzs must be reported to the State Bar of California and turned over to the U.S. Marshals or

U.S. Attorney for immediate investigation and prosecution.

45. For the reasons explained herein, I pray this court will deny Defendant Taitzs

Motion to obtain Plaintiff Lisa Liberis drivers license, to protect Plaintiff Liberi and further

issue a Restraining order upon the Defendants and Geoff Staples to stop the crimes of forgery,

cyber-stalking, obstruction of justice, harassment, violation of a restraining order and aiding in

cyber crimes and violation of a restraining order and other crimes the defendants and their

supporters on their behalf, are committing against the Plaintiffs. Further I pray this Honorable

court will forward this information to the California Bar Association for immediate action

against Taitz and to the U.S. Marshals and/or U.S. Attorney for immediate investigation and

prosecution..



20/20


Liberi v Taitz Affidavit of K Strebel Exhibit 3

Documents

Transcript of Liberi v Taitz Affidavit of K Strebel Exhibit 3