Ask Away

Bryan Dubois
Mar 23, 2010

I understand that some people are curious about my previous relationship with Elsebeth Baumgartner.  Initially I didn't want to get into that subject matter because it creates an endless back and forth type argument that serves no purpose.  However, I realize some people have legitimate concerns or curiosity, and with clear answers their concerns can be addressed.

Oliver Hardy suggested that I allow people to ask their questions, but I do have a few issues with the request:

Please consider the bizarre legal implications created by interacting with the spouse of the person who was convicted of intimidating my family.  Interacting with that person in any sense - especially over the internet - is extremely unwise.  I'm not going to do it. 

So I'll make a deal with all readers:

If you ask a question about the subject matter out of curiosity and good faith, I'll answer it.  I won't answer questions that are obviously coming from people who have already formed an opinion and are only using the opportunity to lash out.

Deal?

Oliver, ask away.

Comments

Bryan Dubois

When did you start up Erie Voices?

June 2004.

When did you first meet Elsebeth Baumgartner and why?

She contacted me after I wrote about June Judge Ann Maschari on the internet.

Did you start up "erievoicestoo" on the internet?

No.  I don't know who started it, but it appears to be an attempt to recreate the Erie Voices website after I removed it from the internet.

Buckeye04

Here is a link to Baumgartner's latest filing at the State Supreme Court, www.sconet.state.oh.us/tempx/642661.pdf 

 

 

Poll of the day....

Is cuddling cheating? 

John Doe

As I mentioned in an earlier thread on 411 (and even earlier threads on SR web site), I have chosen to ignore Julie R's comments, especially towards me.  She has become belligerent (warlike), unreasonable and generally regarded as untrustworthy because she has failed to produce evidence of her accusations.  I have asked (and I'll admit in a rather sarcastic way) to, "Show me the evidence Baby" and she chooses to ignore that which is fine.  411, she won't take you up on your offer because "Remove Johnson" gave her pointers on starting her own blog to show evidence of what she is spewing, and she either completely ignored him or attacked him (I can't remember, because she did both to several bloggers; it's hard to keep them straight and I don't want to waste time going back and trying to find it). 

411, I'll bet my JOB that she won't take you up on your offer because she has been doing this for MONTHS and she has had other bloggers offering her help with her situation to post the evidence, but she repeatedly ignores that advice.  So, you are wasting your time.

She's another Elsabeth Baumgartner.  Don't waste your time.  Stay clear of her.  If she wants to get her evidence out, let her do it on her own blog, not yours.  She's had her chance and she blew it.

STAY AWAY FROM JULIE R ! ! ! ! !   DON'T EVEN RESPOND TO HER BS because she has had PLENTY of opportunities to give her complaints factual support and has refused.  She is just like EB! !  Stay away from her! ! ! ! 

Julie R.

Why don't you dry up? You sound as nutty as the Erie County legal system! Are you from the twilight zone, too?

Julie R.

Elsebeth Baumgartner's case sounds like something straight out of a John Grisham novel but that doesn't surprise me in the least. That's the way Erie County works----to cover up the real issue in a case they create a half a dozen other ones!

I

You never fail to let me down!

Cross

I apologize for tangenting this discussion away from 411's gracious answering of Elsebeth questions, but Julie R being here unfortunately has started a tangent away from facts and discourse to her/his own oasis of self absorprtion.

Unfortunately, Julie R doesn't realize he comes across like this this while posting.

 

 

 

Julie R.

"There's no excuse for ignorance of the law unless our ignorant attorney brothers and/or retired judges break it . If they do we then have the right to feign ignorance of the law to protect them".

With the of exception of disbarred attorney Elsebeth Baumgartner.

Boggle

You've asked questions that have been answered.  Here's my question for you:

Have you ever MET Elsebeth Baumgartner?  I mean, MET her.  Do you KNOW her?  Have you actually listened to her for more than five minutes?  Have you met her on several occasions and had lengthy discussions with her? 

If not, please shut your trap.  You are so annoying.  People are tap dancing around hurting your feelings.  If' you've spoken with her at all, you know the KKK hood story, the clogging the toilet in Ottawa County, the pill popping incident.  You know that she knows SOMETHING about EVERYONE who holds political office.  You know that she is over the top and became undefendable.  She put herself right where she is by being so outlandish that noone could come to her defense. 

Unfortunately, you sound just like her.  For your own credibility, I hope you answer my question.  Somehow, I think you'll just glaze right over it.

Julie R.

I couldn't get on this blog earlier so I posted on Matt Westerhold's  Please Don't Say Transparent blog. Maybe John Doe and others would like to answer the question? Also, no matter how many of you people get on here and try to discredit Julie R. with the conspiracy nonsense and the juvenile pictures it's not going to work. Everything that has been posted about that case has been the truth.

Julie R.

You ask if I have ever met Elsebeth Baumgartner? My answer is no. I never even knew that much about her until I started reading the SR blogs and then other things posted on the internet. And boy was I ever surprised when I found out she was sentenced in the jurisdiction of Cuyahoga County. I was even more surprised when  I saw the mention of a certain Lorain County law firm.

Also, it's obvious that you and most of the rest on here were involved in some way with the Baumgartner case. So considering how we have heard all of your sides to the story why now allow Joe Baumgartner to tell his side?

Cross

There goes Julie R speaking in the third person again.

Since wild conspiracy theories prevail, I'm going to say Julie R. is actually a few friends/family of Elsebeth solely coming here to cause trouble and post craziness in the best traditions of our Else.

I think Julie R is a shared account for several people, with the actual meaning of the login  Joo Lie R<egister>. You lie register.

I've cracked the code! Where's my tinfoil hat, now?

Boggle

If you have not met her, please do not go into full on support mode.  It takes a normal person about 20 minutes to figure out that she's toxic.  It also sounds like you're jumbling up years and years of her rants.  The Lorain County law firm had nothing to do with her Cuyahoga County conviction.

Regarding Joe Baumgartner, you would obviously support criminals' spouses communicating with victims.  Joe Baumgartner is free to talk and tell his side of the story.  He can leave comments, start his own blog, even his own newspaper.  He can write a book for that matter.  Leaving comments on this blog would seem unwise to me.  Considering where his wife is, it wouldn't seem prudent in my opinion.

Julie R.

WOW! Look who's talking about conspiracy theorists now! Sorry, but I don't know Elsebeth Baumgartner and this is not a shared account. John Doe knows who I am.  So does the Probate Court, the Common Pleas (Binette), the Erie County Auditor, the Recorder, Sheriff Lyons.......I mean considering all the complaints that were filed (and incidentally ignored)  they should know.......unless there are numerous other dishonest and unfair cases just like it. Which wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Cross

You still refuse to answer why you reference yourself in the third person.

How can you expect to solve all the universe's legal problems if you can't answer one teensy question.

 

Oliver Hardy

Bob Dole often referred to himself as a third person. Please take your comments to the topic that I have started about Elsebeth onto the forums. Please allow firelands411 to put his energy into new topics.

Cross

Bob Dole is a war hero who in an eccentric manner referred to himself via the third person.

Also, I doubt he did it in writing. Julie R's actions and posts indicate she is a they, and they are likely the clan of Heaven's Gate of Elsebeth or something.

I post frequently on the forums. Forgive me if I continue to also post here while this topic is baking in the oven of public discourse.

In other words, no.

F411 can continue to blog and read and respond to the fun here, or not if he chooses. Free will is a grand thing.

 

Boggle

Well said.

Oliver Hardy

Boogle wrote: "If you have not met her, please do not go into full on support mode.  It takes a normal person about 20 minutes to figure out that she's toxic.  It also sounds like you're jumbling up years and years of her rants.  The Lorain County law firm had nothing to do with her Cuyahoga County conviction."

Boogle, I have started up a forum topic on the SR forums. Please post your comments there if you have the balls to do so. I have a lot of questions for you.

Boggle

I see your post on the forums, but it appears to stop abruptly.  Did you mean to stop it after your quotes for Karl Hungus?  It started off sounding like you meant to ask questions.  What are your remaining questions for 411?  Who cares if others are chiming in?  If you are interested in 411's answers, ask the questions.  I'd like to see the dialogue.  What are your questions for me?  I'm happy to answer them.  I don't think balls are required to meet anyone on an internet forum or blog.  Where shall we begin? 

Oliver Hardy

You asked "Where shall we begin? "

To begin go to the SR FORUMS. THIS blog became a train wreck..

I have questions for you on the forums. Firelands411 set the dialogue for his blog.

Any questions for YOU will be asked on the SR forums.

Boggle

Look, Oliver, I went to your forum post and didn't see any questions listed that were directed to me.  No need to get hostile with me when you haven't initiated your questions. 

Oliver Hardy

Wow Boggle,

Two questions to you. Do you belong to the "Dumbing Down Of America" group?
Do you search for directions on a roll of toilet paper to see how to use it?

I rest my case.

FYI, I have started up a topic on the SR Forums. Go there to ask questions or post your comments. Enough said, OK? Or should I post how to use your roll of toilet paper?

Julie R.

Once again, Julie R. is not a "they". I refer to myself in the 3rd person probably because my real name is not Julie R.  

Once again, I do not know Elsebeth Baumgartner but from my own personal experience with this County's dishonest, unfair and unlawful legal system I believe that Elsebeth Baumgartner was a victim of one of the most horrendous travesties of justice there ever was.  My opinion........and you and nobody else will ever change it.

Cross

Julie, in your opinion did Elsebeth do anything wrong?

bsps tu 1978

It appears to me that the open discussion on Firelands 411 seems to be one-sided.  John Doe and Cross are having conversation with each other, but if you look at their writing styles, you might come to the conclusion that they are both the same person, namely, Bryan.

If someone else comments to the contrary, they are insulted, and sometimes banned.  Not knowing all of the details, how can Elsebeth Baumgartner defend herself when she is in Marysville partly for intimidating her former co-worker and co-owner of the Erie Voices Blog.  He has gone so far as not allowing Mrs. Baumgartner's husband, Joe to reply to any comments, many of which are false if you go back and check the facts.

I do recall that Mr. Baumgartner gave a check to Mr. DuBois for $15,000 and the check was made out to an attorney named Jay Milano.  I believe the check was cashed by Mr. Milano and used to defend Mr. Dubois.  I also recall that when Mr. DuBois filed for bankruptcy he referred to the $15,000 as a loan.  How can this be the case for both.

The last thing that bothers me is how well Bryan recalls the courtroom sequence when Baumgartner took blood pressur pills.  His "facts" were incorrect.  He even had the wrong medication.  I also know that he and Mrs. Baumgartner had worked together for quite some time and that she had a diabetic dog.  That would explain why a syringe was in her purse, and I believe Mr. Baumgartner had the purse when the deputy reached into it.  I believe that he would have an idea of what transpired that day, but he is not allowed to write any about it.

Mr. Baumgartner still has a drugstore in Pemberville, Ohio.  Maybe some people should contact him to get his side of the story.  Every story has at least two sides to it.

Cross


Hi "Julie R".

 I've been posting here in the Forums under 'Richard', and comments as Cross for quite some time. I merged the two usernames when the forums were redone.
It's pretty apparent I'm not John Doe or F411.  Most people are here to discuss things. I'll be glad to sit down in real life and discuss who I am if you'd like.

Bryan Dubois

It appears to me that the open discussion on Firelands 411 seems to be one-sided.  John Doe and Cross are having conversation with each other, but if you look at their writing styles, you might come to the conclusion that they are both the same person, namely, Bryan.

They're not.  I don't log in under different names to answer my own questions.  That's intellectually dishonest and another reason I didn't approve of some of the tactics used on the old Erie Voices website.

If someone else comments to the contrary, they are insulted, and sometimes banned. 

I try not insult people, but if you take diagreement as an insult - then I guess I'm insulting you.  You will cause a debate if you say something illogical, incorrect or just plain stupid on this blog.  It's called robust debate and if you don't like it - don't read this site, and don't leave comments.

Not knowing all of the details, how can Elsebeth Baumgartner defend herself when she is in Marysville partly for intimidating her former co-worker and co-owner of the Erie Voices Blog. 

This is one of the reasons I didn't want to bring up this topic.  Baumgartner is in prison, and since she's not here to defend herself we shouldn't be talking about her.  Likewise, since I'm involved in the case and I offer my memories of what happened I will be attacked by people who don't agree with the outcome.  Since those people are likely associated with Baumgartner - and she's not allowed to have contact with my family nor compel third parties to contact me - it's an unfair set up.

But...

If I don't address the issues, people think I'm hiding something.

So what should I have done? 

He has gone so far as not allowing Mrs. Baumgartner's husband, Joe to reply to any comments, many of which are false if you go back and check the facts.

Of course you are free to believe whatever you like.  If you believe that there are two sides to every story then by that logic my story is just as valid as his.

I do recall that Mr. Baumgartner gave a check to Mr. DuBois for $15,000 and the check was made out to an attorney named Jay Milano.  I believe the check was cashed by Mr. Milano and used to defend Mr. Dubois.  I also recall that when Mr. DuBois filed for bankruptcy he referred to the $15,000 as a loan.  How can this be the case for both.

I'm afraid you have your facts mixed up.  Since this will undoubtedly turn into a back and forth, it is unfair to argue directly with parties who have been or are under the influence of people who have been convicted of crimes involving my family, I won't address this directly.

The last thing that bothers me is how well Bryan recalls the courtroom sequence when Baumgartner took blood pressur pills.  His "facts" were incorrect. 

The sequence is exactly how I remember them.  If you know of the events differently you must've been in the courtroom with us.  If so, offer your version of the events and we'll see if there's any substantive difference between the two. 

He even had the wrong medication.  I also know that he and Mrs. Baumgartner had worked together for quite some time and that she had a diabetic dog.  That would explain why a syringe was in her purse...

But it wouldn't explain why the needle was exposed...

and I believe Mr. Baumgartner had the purse when the deputy reached into it. 

That's not true.  The purse was accessible at the defendent's table and Joe was sitting in the spectator's section behind the defendent's table when she popped the pills. 

I believe that he would have an idea of what transpired that day, but he is not allowed to write any about it.

There wouldn't be any substantive differences between his version of the day and mine.  We were both in the courtroom at the same time. 

Mr. Baumgartner still has a drugstore in Pemberville, Ohio. 

Good for him.  I always thought Joe was a good, decent, hardworking person.  Unfortunately, his wife controlled too much of the situation and dragged him into situations he wasn't equipped to deal with.  If she had listened to her husband's wisdom early on, none of this would've happened.

Maybe some people should contact him to get his side of the story.  Every story has at least two sides to it.

Of course.  Carry on...

Bryan Dubois

The mark of a truly disturbed individual:  No amount of evidence will ever change my mind!

So I'm going to post this advice:

...unless you're going to bring it back on topic, of course.

Buckeye04

Mr DuBois.  The purse was if fact in Mr Baumgartner,s hands when the deputy blindly reached into the bag and pulled out an insulin syringe from a diabetic dog.  Do you really think the deputy would have given he bag back to Mr Baumgartner if he had stuck himself with the "dangerous insulin needle".  Mr Baumgartner left with the purse. You need to rethink this.   We need to poll the witnesses that were in the courtroon that day.                                                                     

Pages