LETTER-REBUTTAL TO THE EDITOR OF THE CISS e-NEWS MAGAZINE

From: DEAFSPORTLAWSUIT - Jun 2, 2003

June 2, 2003

Dear Editor,

Today  I received the freshest copy of your CISS e-News Magazine, Number 213, May 2003 issue.

As a former loyal and dedicated contributing writer for this CISS news publication and current lawsuit litigant, I am immediately issuing my Letter-Rebuttal to your just-released CISS PRESS RELEASE and PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE stories
 
  www.ciss.org/enews/may03/prmay03.html  
   www.ciss.org/enews/may03/prexymay03.html

Here are my rebuttal response and comments.

Regarding CISS PRESS RELEASE story, it had 13 paragraphs, of which 7  produced untruthful information and misleading facts related to my first lawsuit action against defendants and co-conspirators  - Mr. John Lovett  (" Lovett" ) , Mr. Jerald Jordan ( "Jordan" ) and Dr. Donalda Ammons ( "Ammons" ):

a)  During my September 24, 2002 deposition session I never used the  three words such as "dependent on welfare." I have a copy of the  8-hour deposition session's videotape  in my possession to prove that I never uttered such words, which I view as defaming and degradable ones for me, a typically self-sufficient and independent deaf person;

b) I never  specifically intended to request  to subpoena Dr. Bobbie Beth Scoggins, the President of the USADSF and non-party to the lawsuit action, to  personally produce the documents and correspondence. Instead, because of my initial confusion with the complex Court rule procedures, I, as a pro se, was not able to properly, appropriately and in timely manner file with  the Court my request to subpoena the two organizations - the CISS and USADSF ( not Dr. Scoggins )  - to produce the relevant documents and correspondence;

c) I never asked "the Court to AUTHORIZE me to be a delegate to the CISS Congress in Sweden." What I asked the Court on the eve of the 38th CISS Congress, instead , was that to "issue  a Temporary Restraining Order against defendants Jordan, Ammons and Lovett, so I would be able, inter alia, to act as a full-fledged delegate of Uzbekistan at the 38th CISS Congress and socialize with anyone whomever I wished, except defendants Jordan, Ammons and Lovett, in Sundsvall, Sweden." Temporary Restraining Order or TRO is  an emergency remedy of brief duration which may issue only for exceptional circumstances and only until the trial court can hear arguments or evidence, as the circumstances require, on the subject matter of controversy and otherwise determine what relief is appropriate.

d) In the  April, 7, 2003, 20-page Memorandum Decision by the Court, there was no specific sentence, which was incorrectly reported by your story, namely,

"the Court stated that "Pinchas has offered no evidence beyond his own unsupported allegations" and that plaintiff's ( Pinchas' ) descriptions of incidents were "extremely vague and indefinite";

e) I filed a new lawsuit action against Ammons and Jordan at the Court much earlier, i.e., on  March 24, 2003 ( not "in mid-April 2003" ), and the same Court made a decision on my another lawsuit case against Jordan, Ammons and Lovett on April 7, 2003 ( again, not "in mid-April 2003," as your story incorrectly reported ), and

f) The CISS is currently managed by an Executive Committee of eight ( not nine ) persons.

Regarding Lovett's PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE, his column had two paragraphs devoted to the lawsuit matter.

Before rebutting Lovett's comments, let me make the record straightforward and clear on the following six relevant  lawsuit dates and facts:

September 17, 2001 - I filed a  private lawsuit action against Jordan, Ammons and Lovett at the Court ( not in October, 2001, as Lovett reported in his column ). The organization of the CISS was not named as a defendant in this legal action;

May 13, 2002 - Jordan, Ammons and Lovett filed a countersuit (or, counterclaim ) against me at the Court;

September 16, 2002 - Jordan, Ammons and Lovett  themselves ( not me ) were the ones who filed their Motion to Intervene the CISS as a Fourth Defendant in the lawsuit action;

October 3, 2002 - I filed my Motion in Opposition to include the CISS as a Fourth Defendant in the legal action. In my opposition papers filed with the Court, among the other things, I cited and argued that in order to include the CISS as a party to the lawsuit action,  defendants Jordan, Ammons and Lovett should  have first asked  the CISS Executive Committee and then the CISS Congress delegates for their permission and approval to include the CISS as a lawsuit party. I also presented  in my these opposition papers nine ( 9 ) different CISS Constitution Rules ( Rules  10.2.7, 10.2.7.6, 10.2.7.6.1, 10.2.7.6.2, 10.2.7.12, 10.3.1, 10.4.7. 10.4.7.2 and 10. 4.7.12 ), in which  Jordan, Ammons and Lovett should have asked the CISS Executive Committee and  then the CISS Congress - in one way or another -  in order to constitutionally and lawfully propose to include the CISS as a Fourth Defendant  in the lawsuit action;

March 24, 2003 - As I reported above, I filed my new and separate lawsuit action against Ammons and Jordan  on a private basis only, and

April, 7, 2003 - The Court made, among the other things, decisions on three important items:  

- it denied May 13, 2002 Motion for countersuit by Jordan, Ammons and Lovett against me;

- it granted  September 16, 2002 Motion by Jordan, Ammons and Lovett to include  the CISS as a Fourth Defendant,

- it closed down my lawsuit action against  Jordan, Ammons and Lovett.

Now, you can see that the organization of the CISS was judicially involved as a lawsuit litigant for just one day, i.e., on April 7, 2003, which was the day the Court also decided to close my lawsuit case against Jordan, Ammons and Lovett.

In your both CISS PRESS RELEASE and PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE stories Lovett, Jordan and Ammons remained mysteriously silent by not reporting a  single word  about the status of their much-publicized countersuit action the three filed  against me on May 13, 2002. Moreover, your e-News Magazine prominently displayed  such a countersuit matter on its June, 2002 issue website
  
www.ciss.org/enews/counterjune02.html

Now, you can again see that Lovett, by attempting to positively  and artifically boost his, Jordan's and Ammons'  image while discrediting mine,  mischaracterized the status of our first lawsuit as a whole, when he wrote to say in his column the sentences such as,

"I have some good and bad news..."
"We are pleased that the lawsuit outcome was in our favor."

How can Lovett, who was a friend of mine for 24 years and who  suddenly betrayed me under the strong influence and covert pressure of the still Pinchas-paranoid defendant Jordan,  justify these statements  -   "I have good news... lawsuit outcome was in our favor.." - when his,  Jordan's and Ammons' countersuit of May 13, 2002 against me was a  total fiasco?

Another very touchy issue in his column Lovett  raised was  the use of over USA $15,000.00 in legal fees.

Briefly, for a number of valid and justified reasons, the troika of defendants - Jordan, Ammons and Lovett - unlawfully took away these public CISS Treasury funds because of the two major things:

a) in order to get the so-called "free ride", i.e.,  not to pay  their legal fees from their own personal pockets,  it was  the troika of lawsuit defendants - Jordan, Ammons and Lovett ( not me ) who "painted" the organization of the CISS as a lawsuit party, and

b) on February 27, 2003, the delegates of the 38th CISS Congress, under Ammons' Congress proceedings' presiding and hypnotization,  hurriedly approved the granting of  this large monetary amount to Jordan, Ammons and Lovett in a highly-dubious and  unconstitutional manner.

Let me educate you something by vividly presenting the following facts.

By February 27, 2003, the first day of the 38th CISS Congress, the organization of the CISS had eighty three ( 83 ) countries who were listed as the Full CISS Nation Members.

According to the Minutes of the 38th CISS Congress
 
    www.ciss.org/about/congress.html  

on February 27 there were just thirty eight ( 38 )  countries out of  eighty three ( 83 )  present as the delegates at the first day of the Congress, which obviously meant  that the Congress failed to meet the required  50% quorum criteria.

Note: the definition of the CISS Constitution Rules 10.2.3 and 10.2.3.1 state the following:

"Quorum. A Congress shall have a quorum when at least fifty percent ( 50% ) of Full Members are present.
 
  www.ciss.org/about/constitution.html

Thus, on February 27, the first day of the 38th CISS Congress,  Ammons, an unconstitutionally-elected CISS Secretary General and well-known abuser of the CISS legal system,  was the one who ran the Congress session show. Again, she very irresponsibly, knowingly and willfully committed, among the other things, the  new, serious and  huge rule violations in the CISS legal system  - that is, Rules 10.2.3 and 10.2.3.1 - by masterfully, purposefully, cynically and maliciously convincing all the Congress delegates to unanimously approve the CISS Finance Report, which also included the taking  away of USA $15,000.00 from the CISS Treasury funds for her, Jordan's and Lovett's  lawsuit fee expenses. This  was done in spite of the facts that by February 27, 2003:

a) Jordan, Ammons and Lovett did not yet officially  and in advance get the permission from the CISS Congress delegates to include the organization of the CISS as a lawsuit party; as was required by the CISS Constitution rules;

b) the Court's decision to include the CISS as a Fourth Defendant in the lawsuit action was still pending before the USA District Court for the District Court of Maryland in Baltimore, Maryland, USA, and

a) in her complete defiance of the CISS Constitution Rules 3.1, 3.1.11 and 15 and by arrogantly ignoring the written pleas by the chief sports leaders from  the USA, Russia and Croatia ( i.e., to solve the lawsuit dispute between the feuding parties internally ),  Ammons  denied  me the basic, free and democratic opportunity to "tell my side of the lawsuit story" to the CISS Congress delegates while I was in Sundsvall, Sweden, on that day of February 27.

Furthermore, the most unusual and interesting thing about the lawsuit action had been ( and still is ) that Jordan, Ammons and Lovett, including their attorney, kept the public (especially, all the CISS Nations Members ) in the dark by not fully informing them about their every court paper submission move and lawsuit case's developments, while they three unpatriotically  and selfishly demanded the public organization like the CISS  to foot  their private legal expense bill from the always-cash-struggling CISS Treasury!

On the other hand, with much interest, I read the whole contents of  your Number 213 issue, in which you presented some interesting  materials. However, to my much regret, I must be honest with you that, as in the past, your whole issue was prepared in a poor and unprofessional taste. By reviewing seven purely CISS-related stories  and materials published in this issue, I spotted over  seventy five ( 75 ) errors, inaccuracies,omissions and misfacts in the issue's contents alone! For example, Tiffany Granfors' short story incorrectly identified the position in the IOC of Mr. Gilbert Felli: he is now IOC's Olympic Games Executive Director ( not IOC Sport Director ). Your issue  also reported  the names of nations entered for the 2005 Deaflympic Games in team sports, but missing  from these lists were the names of nations entered in the world's most popular sport -  men's and women's football.

Finally, let me conclude this important Letter-Rebuttal with such a question: How can one expect to justify Ammons' comments made in the bottom part of the CISS PRESS RELEASE column ( "Regardless of the plaintiff's actions, CISS will fully honor its obligations and commitment to serve all its members fairly and ethically while promoting the ideals behind the CISS Motto - "Per Ludos Aequalitas - Equal Through Sport" ) when Ammons, along with her still unconstitutionally-elected CISS President  and now-ex-lawsuit defendant Lovett, continues to run the organization of the CISS in the manners of  rules violations, stagnation, cronyism, autocracy, deception, anarchism, ineptness and incompetence, including Ammons' and Lovett's  supervision of the publication of this questionably-prepared  Magazine issue?

Sincerely Yours,

Rafael Pinkhasov Pinchas

P.S. I am forwarding this Letter-Rebuttal  through the info@ciss.org e-mail system. In the interests of freedom of speech, justice, accurate news reporting and in order  to restore LAW and ORDER inside the organization of the CISS, I am requesting you, dear Editor, to publish the above Letter-Rebuttal in your next Number 214 issue of this e-News Magazine. You should  know that the organization of the CISS and its e-News Magazine are not the sole property of the just three persons-autocrats - Lovett, Ammons  and Jordan, but it is supposed to be the full property of the whole world and all the CISS Nation Members. Should you decide to decline to publish my Letter-Rebuttal, please advice me so promptly.
Thank you.