Great – We always need more help in all our committees, INCLUDING LEGAL, so cooperatively we can get more done. Let’s move this conversation offline and strategize how we can help each other in all pending cases.

I understand and do want to move on from this misunderstanding. I will abide by your wishes. I do want to clarify that I do not advocate filing pro se for the sake of being a martyr. I ALWAYS encourage anyone I assist with trying to find affordable legal representation, and where appropriate, like in two of my cases, I request the court to appoint counsel for the litigant. My issue, at least the one I have perceived from this forum, is that pro se litigation is doomed to fail and should be avoided at all costs, even when the fight warrants litigation. Many people, especially those in our boat, experience harms caused by the registry that can either be redressed in court or, at the very least, provide a sense of active enablement that can give them peace to their situation. Unfortunately, they do not have the funds to hire attorneys to fight for them. To those individuals, I encourage, as should FAC, to be smart and informative, not scared, when facing this demon pro se. For example, I received an additional college degree in paralegal studies and I am a certified paralegal. I communicate with attorneys who are gracious enough to provide me advice. I research case law and analyze those arguments which are successful in court and those which are not before attempting to file a complaint or motion. I understand my opinion regarding this topic is not a popular one, but I asked us not to jump to conclusions when the prospect of filing pro se arises. Enough said on this topic. I agree it is time to move on.

Kyle, we do not encourage pro se litigation because we’ve been very burned by people who created bad case law that all of us have had to try to overcome. That’s not suggesting there are not brilliant non-lawyers out there who are smarter than a Supreme Court Justice, but there are logistical issues that face pro se litigants as well as a general bias against a pro se litigant.
We all get that you are pushing the pro se angle (and in full disclosure to our readers you prepare paperwork for people to file pro se), that’s your gig and you are entitled to it, but we do not want to endorse it for some pretty valid reasons. First, what happens if/when there is a hearing or trial and your client needs to show up and argue? You can’t represent them and if they can’t hire someone to step in, they are fending for themselves and often left hanging. Second, often people chose not to hire an attorney because they cannot afford one. If they can’t afford an attorney, what will happen when they need to hire expert witnesses?
For challenges we endorse and help facilitate, we want to make sure they are fought by qualified and licensed attorneys who are not only familiar with the area of law, but the rules of civil procedure and local rules of court. We also want cases to be properly funded so that they can be supported by the best experts and right resources.
We wish you and everyone anywhere who files a pro se lawsuit the best of luck and hope for tremendous victories. We hope that you can wish FAC the best of luck in our challenges as well, and simply leave it at that.
As far as the “barrage of attacks and criticism”, there’s no barrage here. You should try moderating a forum for registrants to see some of the comments posted by vigilantes. Then you might appreciate what attacks are. If you like, to accommodate your concern I can remove all comments from you or in response to yours and wipe the slate clean. Or, we can just let it go and move on to a different topic. I just can’t handle the drama anymore and you really shouldn’t be texting me (or any board member) at 8PM to complain about comments in this forum. It’s just not appropriate.
So please lets make up and move on.

I see the “PRO SE” filter is working brilliantly today. LOL. As I type this, there is a pop up in the lower right corner asking to “Let’s spread truth”. How can you be serious when you cannot post such an innocuous statement as a congratulatory reply to the comment posted by Gina. You say you want positivity. Yet, you allow a continuous barrage of attacks and criticism made about one of my comments – which I subsequently apologized for – that you did not post.

As an update to the amended Gainesville City Ordinance, please continue to post public comments and send letters. The first reading of the ordinance was a success. According to the Mayor, he expected the first reading of the amended ordinance to pass by a 4-3 vote. Instead, it was unanimous! The second and final reading will be November 17. As soon as the agenda is uploaded to the Gainesville City Commissioner Meeting Calendar, please begin posting your comments. I will keep you updated on what agenda item it is.

As a family member myself in Gainesville, I greatly appreciate this, Logical. I, too, am writing letters, emails, and sending the research on the ineffectiveness of RR along with the collateral damages they cause.

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Logical

Thank you, Logical! I would especially encourage any City of Gainesville residents to do this, in their own words, if they have time, or maybe place a call to your commissioner expressing support.