On December 23, 2011, Mandelman Matters, a blogger on the West Coast and OhioFraudclosure,a blogger in Ohio, conducted a live Radio interview regarding the events surrounding a recent Delaware County, Ohio set-out. The Homeowner's name was mentioned a few times. The Attorney was referred to as only "the Attorney". Once during the interview the attorney's first name was mentioned. Throughout the interview the attorney is described as though he was merely a puppet reacting to the tugs and pulls of the involved blogger.
The interview demonstrates the fallacy of eyewitness testimony. To demonstrate the problems with eye witness testimony law school professors recount the experiment in which a man storms into an evidence class. Afterwards, the students are asked to provide a statement of what occurred. Few if any noticed the man dressed in a gorilla outfit who walked across the front of the classroom. The Ohio blogger was directly involved in the prevention of the Delaware County set-out. Many of the details are correct. However, many of the details or facts were distorted by the interview. Witnesses, especially witnesses who come forward, will remember their involvement in a slightly altered manner. I was directly involved in the Delaware County set-out and therefore my recollection may also suffer from the same fallacies.
I recall reading an e-mail from my client; contacting the Sheriff's office, and negotiating with the Lender's attorney. I knew the law and was familiar with the legal proceedings, and therefore I could intelligently discuss the situation with those in the Sheriff's office and the law office. I had been involved in the legal proceedings for approximately a month and had filed pleadings in the case before the Court. And Yes I spoke to the Ohio blogger, and he was in contact with Occupy Columbus.
I was dissappointed with the interview on many levels. Trying to be aware of my own flaws, I know that I was dissappointed because my name was not mentioned and therefore I did not receive the free publicity and advertising. I was also disappointed in the language used. The use of profanity was offensive, and was harmful to my testimony and the Ohio blogger's testmony as Christians. The use of profanity was unprofessional and will be used to continue to label Homeowners facing foreclosure and the Occupy movement as deadbeats and lunatics.
I was most disappointed by the interview's focus on the "blog's" ability to stop an eviction. Homeowners need information and the bloggers are doing a great service to Homeowners by providing Homeowners with information to fight foreclosures. However, the interview's emphasis on the role of the blogger will only continue to encourage Homeowners to fight foreclosures on their own; without the assistance of counsel. On December 8, 2011, the Homeowner who was the subject of the Delaware County set-out was interviewed, and the most profound statement he made was that he wished that he had retained an attorney much earlier instead of trying to defend himself.