Send a Message
to eleve

Comments

407

Joined

Jan 12, 2009

eleve Profile

Forums Owned

Recent Posts

Monterey, CA

Bergstrom to appeal for new trial

It's been suggested that you use a moniker more in keeping with the style of your posts, so instead of DMo, you're now officially DBag. We're gonna go ahead and call you that until you start to act like a reasonable adult - totally up to you how long that takes. Have a nice day, DBag.  (Sep 11, 2011 | post #188)

Monterey, CA

Bergstrom to appeal for new trial

He was sentenced to the maximum term allowable (58 years). Sherrer-Daly's (undated) letter says he's at Corcoran. http://www.cphcs.c a.gov/docs/respons es/PR_20080318_i1_ Sherrer_Daly.pdf Excerpt from the KSBW article: http://www.ksbw.co m/news/11195714/de tail.html POSTED: 2:26 pm PST March 7, 2007 UPDATED: 9:40 pm PST March 7, 2007 http://www.ksbw.co m/news/11195714/de tail.html#ixzz1Vbb 8MyrS SALINAS, Calif. -- James Daly, the Carmel Valley doctor who fled the country during his trial on child molestation charges in April 2005, has been returned to Monterey County and now sits in jail, officials said Wednesday. Daly was arrested on Oct. 1, 2005, in Uruguay, seven months after leaving the country. Excerpt from the High Beam article: http://www.highbea m.com/doc/1P3-1346 953621.html US Fed News Service, Including US State News June 19, 2007 The Monterey County District Attorney issued the following press release: Monterey County District Attorney Dean D. Flippo announced today that on June 18, 2007, convicted child molester James Edmond Daly was sentenced to 58 years in state prison for 22 felony child molest charges that a Monterey County jury convicted him of on April 13, 2005. Daly, age 66, molested the victim between 1992 and 1999, when she was between the ages of 5 and 12.  (Aug 20, 2011 | post #169)

Monterey, CA

Bergstrom to appeal for new trial

Not 100% on this but believe Carl had at least one DUI. It's been some time - maybe 10-15 years ago. His rehab was for substance abuse. Most people who abuse intoxicants have a "substance of choice" but will use/abuse another to get high when that's not available. They are instructed to avoid all such, at least during the acute phase of their recovery, if not throughout their lives.  (Aug 20, 2011 | post #165)

Monterey, CA

Bergstrom to appeal for new trial

It was understood that your posting of Sherrer-Daly's letter was intended to make your/Carl's claims of wrongdoing on the part of the judge more believable. IMO, it doesn't. What might do that is an explanation of what motive the judge would have to engage in "…predatory behavior", replete with "…half-truths , and prejudice…". Why would he do that? Why against Carl? What examples/facts/pro of do you have to back those assertions? At least Sherrer-Daly's letter cites examples (i.e, tapes of the mother coaching the daughter to make allegations, an extortion email). Are you able to do the same?  (Aug 20, 2011 | post #164)

Monterey, CA

Bergstrom to appeal for new trial

You know, DMo, for a few posts there (#145, 147 & 148) you were actually starting to sound like a reasonable person. Then, you blew it by getting nasty and personal. Now this, quoting Renee Sherrer-Daly of all people. Do you know who she is? Her husband, like Carl, was a physician and is now a felon; he is a convicted child molester. She was suspected of helping him flee the country. If you're looking to lend credibility for your arguments, she's probably not the best source. Here's an excerpt from an article in the Monterey County Weekly: http://www.montere ycountyweekly.com/ news/2006/jan/26/r omantic-getaway/ Wife of a convicted child molester investigated for helping husband evade arrest. By Ryan Masters Thursday, January 26, 2006 Local prosecutors have been investigating Renee Daly, wife of convicted child molester James Daly, in an effort to uncover the extent of her role in aiding her fugitive husband since his sudden flight last April. Stephanie Hulsey, the Deputy District Attorney who is prosecuting James Daly, declined to comment about whether or when Renee Daly would be charged with any crime. However, documents obtained by the Weekly show that Melanie Rogers, lead investigator for the District Attorney’s office, believes that Renee Daly aided her husband in fleeing the country and evading arrest, actions which could make her an accessory to a felony. Daly, who was arrested in May 2004, skipped his sentencing hearing on April 12, 2005. He had been tried on charges of aggravated assault, kidnapping and forcible rape of a preteen girl. He was subsequently convicted in absentia on 10 counts of molesting a family member between the ages of 5 and 12. His conviction was based, in part, on police recordings of Daly’s phone conversations with the victim, in which he said that she had been his “love object.” He faces a maximum sentence of 58 years in prison. In an application for a search warrant filed last April by the DA’s office, Rogers states: “I have reason to believe and do believe that [Renee Daly] has aided James E. Daly’s ability to flee and evade arrest…” The document also stated that Rogers believed Renee Daly would continue to aid her husband with the proceeds from the sale of their Carmel Valley home.  (Aug 18, 2011 | post #160)

Monterey, CA

Bergstrom to appeal for new trial

Have you seen the most recent article in the Monterey paper? http://www.montere yherald.com/ci_185 50296  (Jul 29, 2011 | post #125)

Monterey County, CA

Bergstrom victim sues him in civil court for damages

Most of Justinia's post are quotes of things you've previously said to her and others here. And why do you have to meet? Still planning that in-person debate? You told us you had a "doctorate-le vel" education. If that's true, surely you can come up with some valid, fact-based rebuttal. You had to do that for your thesis, right? It should be a lot easier to do in an online forum from the relative comfort of your study. Or are you implying that you would beat her up (or worse) if you met in person? If you think what's said is repulsive, take a look in the mirror at the author and (to a coin a phrase from MJ) ask yourself to change your ways. Get a clue, girl.  (Jun 6, 2011 | post #1833)

Monterey County, CA

Bergstrom victim sues him in civil court for damages

Hey, FYI! Look here! We've found the culprit! Here's the person who was impersonating Carl in these forums. He's back and again trying to impersonate a doctor by making a reference to HIPPA [sic] and talking about getting medical information from a patient's chart. Of course, one would hope no real medical professional would act in such a way, by publicly discussing someone's medical condition, particularly falsely implying that a patient had an embarrassing personal problem, and by suggesting that they would illegally and unethically obtain access to HIPAA-protected information on a patient's chart. Wait, now that I think about it, the court documents associated with these cases do contain a whole lot of testimony about a physician behaving in an unethical and illegal way, so I guess it's not wholly unprecedented. But I guess that person left themselves open to some lawsuits, too.  (Jun 6, 2011 | post #1831)

Monterey County, CA

Bergstrom victim sues him in civil court for damages

Hey, there, thought you were: a) Getting a new alias 'cause this one had "run it's course". b) Getting a registered account because some "person [was] poaching [your screen] name" and "pissing off some folks". As YOU are an obvious HATER (see my reply to FYI where I describe the people she attacks - same applies to you), you'll probably "piss off some folks" no matter what name you post under (since that seems to be your goal) but just curious as to why you didn't do either of those things. Tell us, sweetheart, is it because you were lying once again and/or because you're too lazy to get off your fat ass and do it yourself? My question to FYI had to do with her calling someone an idiot and then making a vague and unsubstantiated reference to court transcripts and appeals documents. It was a question about facts, and if FYI had the transcripts, it would seem to be a fairly easy thing to do to quote 3 or 4 lines of his testimony to make her point (a seemingly important one) that "…that is not what [Carl] said" regarding sodomizing JD1. Since you both really want the rest of us to believe that he didn't do that, and since the transcripts are available, it would seem a very easy victory for her to post what he said (with document references) and clear the matter up. Here's one of the fundamentals that you really seem to struggle with: if you make a statement and you want people to believe it, back it up with a fact. (See, like I just did - all references available right here on this forum for anyone to see.) You flap your trap all the time about facts but don't ever seem to actually employ them. Your posts are mostly emotional rants with some BS threats and name-calling. Here in America, we call that feeble and childish (and sometimes illegal). Go try one of those remedial "reading for comprehension programs", and maybe you'll get your own clue, girl. Meanwhile, make me another samage. You did a pretty good job on the last one.  (Jun 6, 2011 | post #1830)

Monterey County, CA

Bergstrom victim sues him in civil court for damages

To address the "set him up" part of your post. For what part of what happened that night do you think someone "set him up"? To go out to bars and drink heavily (in this case while using prescription narcotic and amphetamine-like drugs)? (As a side note, was it ever made clear who was covering his practice while he was intoxicated that night?) To pick up some chick he barely knew, go somewhere and have sex with her? Carl himself said (and even you've acknowledged) that that had been his pattern for years. As I've said before, I'm so sorry to see this guy whom I know to have many good qualities come to such a pass but the way he behaved, it was clear he was steering himself toward some great misfortune. So, now that I think about it, you're right. It was a set up - Carl set himself up and he has no one else to blame for the current state of his life.  (Jun 5, 2011 | post #1814)

Monterey County, CA

Bergstrom victim sues him in civil court for damages

What does that mean - "[y]ou seem to know a little too much"? Like you (uh oh!), I remember someone posting with a screen name that implied they were Carl. Does that mean you know a little too much, and you'll have to start suspecting yourself of having posted them? It was probably during one of your "Eve Black" turns. As to the other part of your comment, as usual, it's another laughable and pathetic attempt on your part to try to save face and feel superior. Your whole purpose in these forums has been clear to everyone: to try desperately to defend Carl's behavior (and your own) and, when you couldn't do that, to blindly and viciously attack anyone who didn't go along with your delusional "he's 100% innocent and that dirty rotten scoundrel he brought home was in league with the DA, the other JDs and probably the Taliban in a grand conspiracy to besmirch this model's citizen's good name and steal all his money". While you're compiling your list of suspects, don't forget Verbal Kint - he's such a sleeper!  (Jun 5, 2011 | post #1813)

Monterey County, CA

Bergstrom victim sues him in civil court for damages

Please tell us how comments made after the fact in an online public forum by non-principals are "extremely important" to a rape case or the subsequent civil suit. As I recall, the comments you claim were made by someone "who pretended to be Carl" (which sounded pretty convincingly Carl-like) in essence told forum participants to mind their own business, find something better to do than discuss Carl and (in less polite terms) go jump in a lake. Even if it was someone pretending to be Carl, what exactly do you think that proves? If "each [comment] made on these forums…is being reviewed and submitted as evidence", does that mean yours are, too? You've had quite a few, and one wonders if someone might be looking into a libel suit against you or holding you on a 5150.  (Jun 4, 2011 | post #1806)

Monterey County, CA

Bergstrom victim sues him in civil court for damages

Most people don't have access to the trial transcripts and appeals briefs. But it sounds like you do so, instead of calling other people "idiots" , why don't you share some of the "facts" (i.e., verbatim transcription) contained in those documents? Several people have asked you for that. If you believe it to be so different from what is commonly understood and so powerful, why don't you post it? Maybe it would persuade some of us to think differently, which is something your name-calling, condescension and vague references without relation to anything tangible won't do.  (Jun 4, 2011 | post #1800)

Monterey County, CA

Bergstrom victim sues him in civil court for damages

From whom did you get a call? Just curious if you're trying to imply that it's the person you've repeatedly and erroneously suggested I am. If so, one would imagine there was a lot more to talk about than your screen name. Additionally, it would make this a good time to acknowledge you've been mistaken - here's your opportunity to clear the air on that particular. If you're really trying to suggest that someone has been "poaching [your] name", please clarify which items you're hoping to ascribe to someone else - just list the post numbers of those you want us to believe WEREN'T written by you. BTW, there's a quick fix for that, as sunnycali has suggested to you before: set up a registered account. It's really easy and then there's never a problem with someone "poaching " your screen name. And since you've asked for suggestions for a new alias, here you go: Beavis' BFF.  (Jun 3, 2011 | post #1789)

Monterey County, CA

Bergstrom victim sues him in civil court for damages

You win! You fooled us all. Here we've been thinking that you were one of Carl's male friends but the jig is up. The evidence: You have a tough time making up your mindQUOTE who="DMo "]Send more, I'm loving it![/QUOTE] You're notorious for your emotional tirades (they must be fueled by all that "estrogine " you produce). It's rare that we've seen you "deal in facts" in these forums. Ergo, by your own standards, you must not be a man. Don't you worry your pretty little head though. We've got a nice gift made up for you, too (can't have a cat fight between you & FYI over the goodies): there are some stockings, a vacuum cleaner and a number of books by Christiane Northrup. Now go make me a samage.  (May 22, 2011 | post #1747)