The Govednik Affair - Page 4

Bob McKown wrote:

 "Why would Al do that? since the judge has dismissed mssv,s suit 4 differnt (sic) times because of lack of evedince? (sic)"

Then he wrote:

"Evediently (sic) the judge who is over seeing it does 3 Times to boot " He has a better lawyer" thats (sic)your play? you muling quim!(sic) (Actually the expression is "mewling quim" from the Avengers movie and means whining c*nt. I guess you can use a vile  expression like that if you use language from a comic book/movie ?) Charges brought 3 times and 3 times were dismissed!!! Wether (sic) you like it or not it,s (sic) public record"

Someone has a problem counting and with court procedures ?

Here is a link to the actual court records from the official Hex Investigation website

http://hexinformation.webs.com/courtdocuments.htm

Case filed ONCE
Motion for a Summary judgement by Defendant (Govednik)
followed by a motion (by plaintiff)to amend the original complaint (granted) The court then granted the Summary Judgement based on both the original and amended complaint. A summary judgement does NOT mean the case was dimissed for "lack of evidence" not one time much less three or four like Bob claimed. !  It's kind of retarded to claim court records say a complaint was dismissed three and four times when the actual records show a summary judgement was granted.  Also notice where Al reimburses MSSV for unauthorized personal expenses. Why would you reimburse the club if your use of the club credit card was legit?


Thomas Barriano
Dubheasa Germania (11/05/99-08/11/08) SchH III M R Brevet AKC WD III AWD 1 STP 1 CD WAC TT
Ascomannis Jago (06/20/03) SchH III AKC WD III AWD I TT WAC
Belatucadrus (08/14/05) DS BH TT MR I
Flannchadh von der Bavarianburg (5/21/08) TT IPO II STP I
Winterfell Arya (11/27/09)BH TT K9NW I
Gwrgenau vom Himmelhoch (8/19/09 BH TT

Thomas:

                     What those records show is the judge allowed the ammended suit and then said there were no grounds for the suit no one that claimed loss could show loss.

And Al did,nt pay back any money to the club he paid off a credit card that was issued based on his social security # and that had his name on it and then cancelled it which I would call a very smart move since the character of those involved based on the failed suits comes into question!  

Bob,

Try to spin it anyway you want. People can read the actual court papers for themselves and decide.
The point is a summary judgement was granted partially based on the fact that the plainitffs couldn't show personal loss.(the loss was to the "club")  not that Al didn't misuse the club credit card.  There is nothing in the court records to indicate that the MSSV club credit card was issued under Al's SS number.. I have never seen a club credit card that required an individuals Social Security Number?
You can state  the "character of those involved based on the failed suits (suit not suits) comes into question! "
I call into question the character of someone who makes threatening and obsense phone calls, makes false accusations to the meda and on the internet, solicits donations under false pretenses and fails to deliver on promises to provide final necropsy, lab and  private investigator reports.
I also question the character of anyone who allows surrogates to make threats and vile posts in his defense.

Thomas Barriano

Thomas:


                  There is no spin to it, Yes it,s in writting from a judge. And i find the character of a individual like your self saying that trials will be boycotted because Al judges them, and your not even in any of the effected orginizations! are you? please correct me if i,m wrong where can you trial to even back that up???? And someone has to put a little truth to the story you and Jim tell.    

Bob writes:

There is no spin to it, Yes it,s in writting from a judge
> a summary judgement was granted. The charges weren't dimissed for lack of evidence and the case wasn't dimissed 3 or 4 times like
>you've stated
 
And i find the character of a individual like your self  (sic) saying that trials will be boycotted because Al judges them,

>Al's license has been downgraded and he is on an 18 month probation because he has abused his power and embarassed the UScA  judges >program. Lots of competitors will choose not to trial under him.

and your (sic) not even in any of the effected orginizations!(sic)  are you? please correct me if i,m (sic)  wrong where can you trial to even back that up????

>I answered the question previously but the post was deleted (not sure why).  I am a member in good standing (unlike Mr Govednik) of both UScA
>and USMRA and can trial at any and all AWDF member club trials. I trialed in 2012 at UScA, USMRA, DVG and USRC trials

And someone has to put a little truth to the story you and Jim tell.

>The story that Jim Engels tells is backed by official records. What did he state in his original post that is inaccurate?



Thomas Barriano

*

Thomas:

Mr Engel wrote:

“Even now USCA is in the process of enforcing formal sanctions and judging limitations for Govednik’s deceit, deception and financial irresponsibility
relative to his estrangement from his local club, with mandated formal apology to be forth coming.”

This statement is completely false. Charges presented to the Judges committee were for ONE incident where Al Govednik lost his temper and acted
inappropriately towards members of MSSV at his club. No charges were filed pertaining to “deceit, deception and financial irresponsibility.”
NO physical contact was made. 3 days later apologies were made and accepted, hands were shook. This was backed up by 3 witnesses.
11 months later charges were filed. Punishment handed down was appropriate for charges filed and sustained. Period.

I find his “good ol boys” comments extremely insulting. USCA can not and will not suspend ANYONE because of innuendo,
internet gossip, or accusations that can not be backed up.

Mr Engel what did you hope to have happen by writing this and posting all over the internet? Did you expect USCA to suspend Mr Govednik just
because you say something is true and you have no proof to back it up? Seriously?  USCA would never do that, and you knew that too,
so what was the outcome you wanted?

 
  Frank

Unknown:

                          Why not, it makes for such a exciting and better read when the truth is left behind!  

The outcome I'd like see is some proof or an admission of being wrong, jumping to conclusions and an apology.  I had family members that I see only at family reunion time cross posting this story all over and donating some money as well as everyone else.  There was an absolute firestorm of activity across all dog cultures, not just schutzhund and GSD's over the theft and alleged murder of Hex.

There's been enough time, what is it?

Other than trying to tie the two stories of Hex and any sanctions against Al, I can't say I find the story that far off base.  And on a more abstract level, though the sanctions themselves might not be directly tied to the Hex incident, I find all of these things to be very intertwined.

and I know I'm not "owed" anything, but sure feel like I'm at least owed an explanation or an apology.  But as it stands, we'll probably just have 2 sides that continue to dig their heels in and fight.  History has a way of repeating itself.  Much like I do in these board posts over and over again :)

Here is some proof of a wrong doing but I don't think there will be apologies forthcoming - do you???

Please note the dates - when this attack on Al G failed Mr Gillum went after Al by using the Judges committee.  And use them he did -- He had only a couple of weeks
to make his claims against Al.

Mr Gillum spread Al's Credit Card information on the net and not just to  MSSV members - .  Yeah- Mr Gillum deserved a good punch in
the nose for that and all he got was screamed at = lucky him.  Keep in mind also that Mr Gillum and Al had been friends for 16-17 years...  
so Al was betrayed by someone he felt was a long time and good friend.  

Some keep saying that Al has said this and said that here on the internet- Al has not made one - no, not one post.  

John and I consider ourselves  very good friends of the Govedniks and I am proud to have stood by them and his  as we watch a group of peeps try to take 
a good man down.   

Marsha Mae A