Return to "After the Formal Complaint" Main Page ||| Previous Document ||| Next Document

Fictional testimony?

The Judge Ruled that the Formal Complaint would all be done in writing. As such, I was not permitted to face phone company witnesses, or cross examine them.

The Testimony by Bob Alex, stated no problems were found on my phone lines when Pacific Bell Answered the Complaint. I have never met or spoken to Bob Alex.

If the State or the FBI were to determine that the trouble code 98 was an indication of trouble on my phone lines, it would mean that Bob Alex committed perjury.

Bob Alex has the perfect alibi. He can deny he knew anything about the written Testimony, and point to the fact that his signature was not on the Testimony. Furthermore, he could use the fact that Stephanie Krapf created the Testimony, in the same manner in which she created the fictional phone number, and stated the phone number noted above has the last five digits of "85093."

Likewise, Rod Aguilar's Testimony has no signatures, and he could claim that the Attorney, Darlene Clark, created the Testimony without his knowledge.

Signatures are important. During the Formal Complaint, AT&T Attorney, Darlene Clark demanded that the transcripts I provided be ignored, because they did not have the proper declaration, and signature. Likewise, when I first filed the Formal Complaint, the dockets office would not accept a photocopied document with my signature, and demanded that I provided an original signature.

If the FBI determines that the Testimony was not that of Bob Alex's or Rod Aguilar's, it provides further proof that a telecommunications Consumer's Bill of Rights needs to be established to allow consumers to protect themselves from phone companies that would create fraudulent Testimony.

last edited 01/03/08

Questions and Comments to JTR Publishing. (

You are welcome to visit my business website, JTR Publishing, for V-8 engine swap manuals and parts

Web Site Designed and Created by One Source Graphics, Limited