* Le Roux Lamprecht Inc, Francois Lamprecht.
* 19 Mar: LRLI-FL Re LJ Re LRLI-FL: Re GMC 542/21; MHC 4968/20; CCMA 1279-20
* Tygae: EoP Leg Sub: LJ v GME / EoP NWO SCO: EoP NTE GMZA| EoP Axis MilNec Evac: Lotto: EoP v WiP Law, EoP v WiP Academia, EoP v WiP Media, EoP v WiP Charity, EoP v WiP Peacenik / EoP v WiP Neg.
From: Lara Johnson [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 1:40 PM
To: ‘Le Roux Lamprecht Inc: Francois Lamprecht’
Cc: ‘Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais’
Subject: Re LRLI-FL: Re GMC 542/21; MHC 4968/20; CCMA 1279-20
Attachment: SQ-RK: Reciprocity: Alternative Models of the Social Correctional Expert
TO: Le Roux Lamprecht Inc: Francois Lamprecht:
CC: Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais:
Ref: 19 Mar: LRLI-FL Re LJ Re LRLI-FL: Re GMC 542/21; MHC 4968/20; CCMA 1279-20
Re LRLI-FL: Re GMC 542/21; MHC 4968/20; CCMA 1279-20
I received your 19 March 2021 email
» 19 Mar: 08:35: LRLI-FL Re LJ Re LRLI-FL: Re GMC 542/21; MHC 4968/20; CCMA 1279-20
» 18 Mar: 16:18: LJ Re: LRLI-FL: Re GMC 542/21; MHC 4968/20; CCMA 1279-20.
» 18 Mar: 12:39: LRLI-FL: Re GMC 542/21; MHC 4968/20; CCMA 1279-20: S32 Q for GME
Carers; SAgr Offer MSDM Counsel.
» 18 Mar: 12:22: GMC 542/21; MHC 4968/20; CCMA 1279-20: S32 Q for GME Carers; SAgr Offer MSDM Counsel.
LRLI-FL 01: I have not been the “counsel” in the matter ….
EoP-LJ 01: I don’t know what your objective and/or subjective definition/s of ‘counsel’ is/are.
I will summarize my interpretation of your Elliott Estate counsel representation as follows:
Francois Lamprecht was the lawyer – I don’t know whether he subjectively considered himself to be chief counsel, assistant to counsel, standby counsel, etc’ – who signed his name at the bottom of the Marais Lamprecht Attorneys letters; on behalf of the Elliott Estate respondents; on letters dated 12 May 2020 [PDF: pp.01]; 14 May 2020 [PDF: pp.01]; 29 May 2020 [PDF: pp.01]; using – we are instructed and similar – language implying that the Elliott Estate respondent legal decisions made in the letter/s, were not Francois Lamprecht or Marais Lamprecht Attorneys legal decision making decisions; but on the instructions of one or more Elliott Estate clients.
LRLI-FL 02: …. and Mr. Marais’ offices took the matter over on 1 December 2020. As far as this matter is concerned, please note that my offices are not involved in any way with this estate and/or the executor and/or the heirs thereof.
EoP-LJ 02: Received. As of 01 December 2020, you and your office employees are no longer involved in any way with the Elliott Estate and/or the executor and/or the heirs thereof.
Non Elliott Estate Case Question:
Win Win Co-Learner Standby Counsel Question:
Put differently: Are you or any of your legal assistants willing to sign Le Roux Lamprecht Inc letters, where you confirm yourselves as appointed standby counsel on my behalf; requesting particular information, on my behalf.
If you or law clerks in your firm; are potentially available as a win-win co-learner standby counsel; then that would be of interest to me.
Specifically: I may need to file a legal application related to my LJvLS/Dignitas case efforts to request information from HPCSA and/or SASOP, (a) if not provided by HPCSA in response to my PAIA request; and (b) Dignitas insist that the psychiatrist report must be from a South African psychiatrist.
Does the HPCSA have any objections to SASOP psychiatrists providing an EoP law voter [eop-axis-oath: LJ] South African resident with the mental competency documentation to enable them to get a provisional green light from Dignitas; to be provided to Russian officials for EoP law voters No EoP OKC TRC assisted suicide in Siberia [H 111/19: LJ v LS: PDF: Affidavit: para 31-34/47; pp.15-16/70]; in the event of a UN General Assembly and/or ICJ No EoP OKC TRC vote or ruling [H 111/19: LJ v LS: PDF: pp.67-70/70].
» EoP Leg Sub: 17 Mar: PAIA Info Request: HPCSA.
If I can find a willing South African psychiatrist, then I may also need to make information requests for such psychiatrists report.
A summary of some of my perspectives on types of legal services experts.
If not: no offence taken.
To have or to be: A Fool for a Client:
‘A man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client’?. This proverb is based on the opinion, probably first expressed by a lawyer, that self-representation in court is likely to end badly. As with many proverbs, it is difficult to determine a precise origin but this expression first began appearing in print in the early 19th century. An early example comes in The flowers of wit, or a choice collection of bon mots, by Henry Kett, 1814: …observed the eminent lawyer, “I hesitate not to pronounce, that every man who is his own lawyer, has a fool for a client. [The Phrase Finder: A man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client]
Story of a simple honest man in Pikeville, whose last act of kindness before his death was to buy a can of food for a homeless kitten. Years prior thereto he had been the sole witness in a murder that occurred at night. The lawyer of the accused thought he had a failsafe case, since the only witness was the simple man, whom he would tear to shreds on the witness stand. ‘How Far Can you see in the Dark?’, the lawyer asked. ‘I can see the moon, how far is that?’, was the answer. Pikeville is the home of the founder of the White Supremacist Klu Klux Klan.
» EoP Leg Sub: 11 May: Tom Barack: EoP legal definition of swamp; EoP Obs: Death of HR McMasters Father.
Simon Sinek: It’s likely that if you’re having trouble understanding something, then somebody else in the room is as well. Asking questions doesn’t mean you’re the stupidest person in the room; it usually means you’re the only one brave enough to speak up. I am okay being the idiot. I am not being flip. I am okay everybody in the room going ugh, because I have to ask questions until I understand it; but the reality is that once I can get to the point where I can understand it; I can get it so simple that I understand it, and I can say it in simple terms, that means other people can understand it too. [Simon Sinek: The Truth about Being the Stupidest in the Room].
The psychological phenomenon of illusory superiority was identified as a form of cognitive bias in Kruger and Dunning’s 1999 study “Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One’s Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments”. The identification derived from the cognitive bias evident in the criminal case of McArthur Wheeler, who, on April 19, 1995, robbed two banks while his face was covered with lemon juice, which he believed would make it invisible to the surveillance cameras. This belief was based on his misunderstanding of the chemical properties of lemon juice as an invisible ink. [Wikipedia: Dunning-Kruger Effect]
In my laymans experience, there are various different types of legal services counsel, and what type of counsel you choose depends on what you want from the counsel.
Criminally: If you know – sincerely believe – that you are guilty, then your choice of lawyer would be different, from whether you sincerely believe you are not guilty. Civilly: If you sincerely believe your evidentiary facts are entitled to a civil court evidentiary enquiry hearing; then your choice of lawyer would be different, from whether you believe your facts are right cause you are a member of a particular race, religion, class or gender.
Sun Tzu: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. [History Channel: Sun Tzu – The Art of War].
Donald Rumsfeld: There are known knowns: there are things we know we know. There are known unknowns: we know there are some things we do not know. There are unknown knowns: there are things we don’t know that we know. There are also unknown unknowns: things we don’t know we don’t know. [Donald Rumsfeld: Unknown Unknowns; The Unknown Known: Trailer]
The Johari window is a technique that helps people better understand their relationship with themselves and others. It was created by psychologists Joseph Luft (1916–2014) and Harrington Ingham (1916–1995) in 1955, and is used primarily in self-help groups and corporate settings as a heuristic exercise. Luft and Ingham named their model “Johari” using a combination of their first names. The philosopher Charles Handy calls this concept the Johari House with four rooms. Room one is the part of ourselves that we and others see. Room two contains aspects that others see but we are unaware of. Room three is the private space we know but hide from others. Room four is the unconscious part of us that neither ourselves nor others see. [Wikipedia: Johari Window]
Different Types of Representation:
Pro Se: You represent yourself without any counsel.
Representation of Counsel: You or the court appoints lawyers as your primary strategic and tactical lawfare legal experts.
The Operator; Prescriber and Co-Learner terms are described by criminologist and psychologist Richard Korn [SQ-RK: Reciprocity: Alternative Models of the Social Correctional Expert]
Operator Representation of Counsel:
A lawyer who provides a client with legal services expert representation in accordance to Operator relational principles [SQ-RK: Reciprocity: Alternative Models of the Social Correctional Expert]
An Operator Lawyer is not necessarily a bad thing:
For example: If you know you are guilty as hell; and you lack the ego literacy responsibility skills to own up to your actions; and you know owning up to your actions will in the long run be good for you; but you need someone to kick your ass: you can go to an Operator Lawyer whose ‘operator’ legal services expertise is low tolerance for bullshit; whose tough love includes kicking his clients asses to take responsibility for their actions.
Prescriber Representation of Counsel:
A lawyer who provides a client with legal services expert representation in accordance to Prescriber relational principles [SQ-RK: Reciprocity: Alternative Models of the Social Correctional Expert]
For example: If you know you are guilty as hell; and you don’t want to take responsibility for your guilt; you can shut the fuck up and find a Prescriber Lawyer to try and practice scorched earth lawfare on your behalf; to try to dig you out of a guilt conviction.
Co-Learner Representation of Counsel:
A lawyer who provides a client with legal services expert representation in accordance to Co-Learner relational principles [SQ-RK: Reciprocity: Alternative Models of the Social Correctional Expert]
Katya Komisaruk [WP: Katya Komisaruk] had Co-Learner Counsel who followed her instructions to plead to political necessity; irrespective of whether the judge would deny her plea, as most judges do.
She broke into the building and for two hours trashed a million-dollar mainframe IBM 3031 computer, hacking away at it with crowbar, bolt cutters, hammer and cordless drill. She danced on the computer chips she had pried loose, spray-painted the casing walls with slogans such as “International Law,” “Nuremberg” and “Defense of Necessity,” and climbed to the roof to take similar action against a satellite dish. She left behind a bouquet of flowers, a box of Mrs. Fields cookies, and a poem: “I have no gun / You must have lots. / Let’s not be hasty / No cheap shots. Please have a cookie and a nice day.” Komisaruk walked off the base, hitched a ride to the Bay Area, got some legal advice and gave herself up after holding a news conference at the Federal Building in San Francisco. Cited Nuremberg Treaty. “You’re party to mass murder if you don’t get out there and try to stop it,” she said at her press conference. She upheld the legality of her action under international law, citing the Nuremberg Treaty, signed by the United States, in which nations swear to never prepare for or begin a war of aggression. [LA Times: Katya Komisaruk’s Revolution: Why a Berkeley MBA Trashed a Multimillion-Dollar Air Force Computer in the Name of Peace]
Ted Kazcynsky [WP: Ted Kaczynski] did not have co-learner necessity counsel
Theodore John “Ted” Kaczynski, the “Unabomber,” was charged with a crime for which he wanted to stand trial. He objected to his defense counsel’s attempts to have him examined by a psychiatrist for “schizophrenia.” Kaczynski did not want his political motives for mailing letter bombs to be undermined by a diagnosis of schizophrenia. He clearly understood that both the defense and prosecutors were attempting to do this. Mass killer Anders Breivik has likewise resisted the Norwegian legal system’s classification of insanity, again with the goal of advancing his political beliefs. It is interesting to note that not once have people arrested for Islamic terrorist activities either requested or been coerced into pleading not guilty by reason of insanity. [Cato Unbound: Jeffrey Schaler: Strategieds of Psychiatric Coercion; CCHR: Jeffrey Schaler: Psychiatry as Fraud]
Assistance / Standby Counsel:
Some refer to it as Assistance of Counsel; other as Standby Counsel: Put simply: You basically represent yourself – you make the final legal strategic or tactical lawfare decision – but your own appointed or a court appointed Assistance/Standby Counsel lawyer, provides you with strategic and tactical lawfare legal procedure advice. You speak in court for yourself, ask the other party’s witnesses questions etc; and/or fill out the details of the contents of the legal applications. Your Assistance Standby Counsel helps you to formulate your questions, your strategy and makes sure that the documents you file – affidavits etc – are technically correct in accordance to court procedure requirements. They are like your legal secretary. Generally speaking people who ask for Assistance of Counsel are political activists; who make their own strategic and tactical advice decisions; but appoint Assistance of Counsel lawyers, to advice them on legal procedure issues: how to correctly file the required legal paperwork; so that the opposing parties lawyers can not ask the court for the case to be dismissed or thrown out of court on a legal technicality: ‘incorrectly formatted, filed, or signed ’ legal document.
For example: In the recent US v Ammon Bundy criminal case in Oregon USA; many of the Bundy defendants waived their right to ‘Representation of Counsel’; but accepted ‘Standby Counsel’.[OPB: Ryan Asks to Dismiss Standby Counsel, dismiss charges [ archive.is/RGXIa]; KOIN: Judge OK’s Bundy Medenbach to be own lawyer [archive.is/vVyhe]. Scribd: Motion to allow Hybrid Counsel].
Standby Counsel understand that many times their clients primary goal is truthseeking or changing the law; citizen cooperative lawfare to help the courts to change the law and set better legal precedents; by educating the citizens about their particular issues in dispute. The primary focus is citizenship truthseeking; not resource thieving winning.
Hybrid Counsel is when a client and their lawyer switch between Assistance/Standby Counsel and Representation of Counsel. Sometimes you speak to the court about your case; and/or asks witnesses questions; and other times your lawyer speaks to the court; and/or asks witnesses questions.
Legal Strategies: Win-Win v Win-Lose:
Whatever Counsel you appoint – Assistance/Standby, Representation or Hybrid – it is useful for you – particularly if you prefer win-win cooperative truthseeking – when appointing such counsel to instruct them as to what you want their legal strategy to be: win-win cooperative truthseeking or zero-sum win-lose competition.
It is very difficult, possibly impossible for an attorney to practice a win-win cooperative truthseeking strategy if they have clients who consciously or unconsciously demand to be represented by zero-sum win-lose competition legal counsel.
Zero-Sum Competition Game Legal Strategies:
A zero sum game – whether economic, legal, political or military, etc – is a game with one winner and the other parties, are the losers. If the case sets legal precedent and the losing side was coerced to be losers, then the entire country loses, as the justice system loses credibility as a fair and impartial truthseeking evidentiary enquiry process for the society. As the justice system loses credibility, it collapses, and along with it the state. A legal zero-sum game strategy lawyer will use whatever legal tactics at his/her disposal; and which the court or other parties attorneys allows him to get away with; in order to win.
For example: It is similar to a commons where farmers all share the commons to graze their sheep. If all the farmers agree that they can have a maximum number of say four sheep, then the commons is sustainable: it is not degraded and the commons will provide them with sheep for survival indefinitely. If some of the farmers decide to cheat, then soon all the farmers will cheat, the commons is ruined and all of the farmers and their families experience the famine consequences of ecological overshoot [Wikipedia: Tragedy of the Commons].
Win-Win Cooperation Truthseeking Legal Strategies:
A win-win – whether economic, legal, political or military, etc – cooperative truthseeking strategy game; is where one or more of the parties strategy is truthseeking and cooperative win-win problem solving solutions. This requires the parties to prioritize sincere truthseeking and problem solving of the problem and compromise by taking responsibility for their individual fuck ups; above ego-winning based upon deception and/or coercive force.
EoP – OKC TRC – Axis Alliance [31 Mar: EoP Upd: Sergey Lavrov: Re: EoP Axis Alliance negotiations] Honest Lives Matter [29 Jun: EoP Axis Alliance is an Honest Lives Matter culture] Negotiations correspondence is published at EoP Leg Sub [eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za]
EoP MILED Clerk [EoP Oath PDF]
16 Taaibos Ave, Heatherpark, George, 6529
Sent per electronic notice to:
Le Roux Lamprecht Inc: Francois Lamprecht:
Le Roux Lamprecht Inc: Francois Lamprecht (email@example.com)
Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais:
Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais (firstname.lastname@example.org)