I was thinking about not even bothering to comment on the 'blog' featuring me, but since it is so illogical and factually wrong, a comment is mandated. If legally being a party represented by lawyers as plaintiff to commercial claims, involving numerous corporations that I have been a officer or director over 40 years, makes a citizen a 'serial plaintiff', then put that 'tag' on hundreds of other litigants in NY courts.
Mr. Gomez is not 'fighting back', as all he has done, albeit fronting for others, is engage in proffering lies and name calling, solely to try and derail scamraiders.com's documented reports on his and his cohorts' (George Pavia, John Siebert, Joe Burke, Russo & Burke) illegal and corrupt acts.
If the New York Times, in its 'infinite wisdom', really believes that name-calling and a set-up, phony character assassination from Kenneth Gomez (a thug and flim-flam man), who denies nothing of the charges made (well-documented) by me and Scamraiders.com, is 'fighting back', the Times is not supporting the U.S Constitution and legitimate freedom of speech and freedom of the press that I and Scamraiders enjoy.
Finally, if the 'Old Grey Lady' did its 'homework', it would have learned that I maintain, as plaintiff in my individual capacity, a case against John Siebert, M.D. for defaulted promissory notes, guarantees, indemnifications, etc. involving Siebert's tax improprieties. The index is # 113512/08 filed in Supreme Court New York.
The complaint sustained a motion to dismiss by Siebert's lawyer, Joe Burke. as to the George Pavia case, I won rent stabilization under the aegis of the DHCR. You can go to scamraiders.com and see for yourself the evidence of collusion, corruption and judicial wrong doings engaged in to disenfranchise me from my rights under rent stabilization.
Accordingly, I ask that the Times post my comments herein, in the spirit of justice and fair play.