Blognet


BlognetTitleCardMUSIC: Theme. Intro and fade under.

NARRATOR: Ladies and gentlemen, the story you are about to hear is true. The names have been changed to protect the innocent.

MUSIC: Up, then under …

NARRATOR: You’re a Detective Sergeant. You’re assigned to Internet Detail. A cyberstalker has filed suit against a group of bloggers claiming that he is the victim of harassment. Your job … help get the facts.

MUSIC: Up then under …

ANNOUNCER: Blognet … the documented drama of an actual case. For the next few minutes, in cooperation with the Twitter Town Sheriff’s Department, you will travel step by step on the side of the good guys through an actual case transcribed from official files. From beginning to end, from crime to punishment, Blognet is the story of the good guys in action.

MUSIC: Up and out.

SOUND: Footsteps in hallway.

FRIDAY: It was Wednesday, February 24th. It was cold and overcast in Westminster. We were working the day watch out of Internet Detail. My partner’s Liz Smith. The Boss is Twitter Town Sheriff W. J. J. Hoge. My name’s Friday. It was 9:37 am when Liz and I entered Room S-121, Document Forensics.

SOUND: Door opens. Footsteps across room.

BUNSEN: Good morning, Liz, Joe.

SMITH: Hi, Phil. Did that paperwork check out?

BUNSEN: Well, kinda.

FRIDAY: What do you mean, kinda?

BUNSEN: Well, you tell by looking that it’s not a summons issued by a court, but it may be a poor copy, maybe a second or third generation copy of a real summons.

FRIDAY: Oh?

BUNSEN: To the naked eye it appears to be missing the court’s seal that should be stamped over the deputy clerk’s signature, and the date is missing.

SMITH: Uh, huh. That’s why we brought it in.

BUNSEN: But if you look at this enhanced scanned version, …

FRIDAY: Yeah, it looks like a ghost of a seal.

BUNSEN: … and if I pan over to the line for the date, …

SMITH: There’s something there, but it’s blurry.

BUNSEN: I haven’t been able to get anything clear enough to read, but there was something on that line in the original. This document isn’t a real court-issued summons, but it could be a copy of a copy. If I got something like this in the mail, I wouldn’t take it at face value.

FRIDAY: Well, you’re not the only one who’s doesn’t trust it.

BUNSEN: How’s that?

FRIDAY: Neither did the guy who received it.

MUSIC: Stinger and under.

FRIDAY: 9:58 am. Liz and I returned to the Internet Detail Office.

SMITH: The lawyer wanted us to get in touch as soon as the analysis was finished. Do you want me to send him an email?

FRIDAY: Add what we’ve got to the file and send it to him. I’ll give him a call with a heads up.

SOUND: Telephone receiver picked up. Touch tone phone buttons.

FRIDAY: Good, morning. It’s Sergeant Friday. … I’m fine. We’ve got an analysis on the paperwork you sent us. Liz will be sending you a formal report, but I’ve called to give you a quick heads up. … Our document forensics guy. … He says it may be a copy of a real summons. … More like the copy of a copy. … No, you can just make out the seal over the signature in an enhanced scan. … No, the date’s illegible. … Yes, we can include that in the report. Liz should have it email to you before lunch. … Uh, huh, we can include that too. … Really? … How’s that? … Given his history, I’m not surprised. … Yes, we will. … Good bye.

SOUND: Telephone receiver hung up.

FRIDAY: Liz, he wants you to include Phil’s contact information in your email in case he needs to get an affidavit.

SMITH: OK.

FRIDAY: Do you remember that comment you made about the package when it came in?

SMITH: You mean about the paperwork having an amended complaint but no original?

FRIDAY: Uh, huh. We assumed that the lawyer hadn’t sent everything but just sent what he wanted checked.

SMITH: Yeah?

FRIDAY: He sent the whole package.

SMITH: But service of process wouldn’t be valid without the original complaint.

FRIDAY: Yeah, but it’s Parvocampus.

NARRATOR: On Tuesday, March 1st, several defendants’ motions were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. On Thursday, March 3rd, the court ruled on one those motions. In a moment, the court’s ruling.

MUSIC: Stinger.

ANNOUNCER: Are you a loyal supporter of Team Lickspittle? If you are, you should be showing you support by wearing a Team t-shirt, sweatshirt, or hoodie. They’re just some of the useful trinkets with the Team Lickspittle, Res Judicata, Murum Aries Attigit, Johnny Atsign, and The Grand Hog logos you’ll find at The Hogewash Store. Why not go by today and spend a bit of your hard earned cash in support of Team Lickspittle? All those goodies are available exclusively at The Hogewash Store. You can also show your support by hitting the Tip Jar.

NARRATOR: On Tuesday, March 1st, several defendants’ motions were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. On Thursday, March 3rd, the court ruled on one those motions. Because the plaintiff had improperly attempted to amend his complaint, the court granted the defendants’ additional time to file motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pending the court’s sorting out of which complaint is accepted.

MUSIC: Theme up and under.

ANNOUNCER: You have just heard Blognet, a series of authentic cases from official files. Technical advice comes from the office of the Twitter Town Sheriff’s Department.

MUSIC: Theme up to music out.

ANNOUNCER: Blognet is a work of fiction. Anyone who thinks it’s about him should read Proverbs 28:1.

Be sure to tune in on Monday evenings at 6 pm Eastern Time for the transcribed adventures of the man with the action-packed Twitter account, America’s fabulous Internet investigator—Yours Truly, Johnny Atsign. This is LBS, the Lickspittle Broadcasting System.

11 thoughts on “Blognet

  1. Maybe I’m either too dumb or too smart, but what I can’t wrap my head around is the sending of a copy of a copy of a copy… I just can’t see the point behind it. It’s extra work, to make a copy, then make a copy, and so on. It would be easier to make multiple copies from the original at once.

    That was the trick used in the Mary Mapes/TANG case; the forger made a multiple-generation copy. But in that case, it was to make it look old and faded before faxing it. In this case, that wouldn’t make any sense.

    What would the goal be here? The other things can easily be explained by Parvocampus being really stupid and incompetent. But for the multi-generational copying, I can’t come up with a rationale. Even a really, really, really stupid one.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s