“City can’t conduct or complete a thorough Discovery to prepare a Civil Case against Mr. Aklufi & he still be entitled to plead the 5th” ??
Let’s Review:
From 1993 to 2015 the Law Firm of Aklufi Wysocki held the job title of Beaumont City Attorney.
The Western Riverside Council of Governments wins a $42 Million Lawsuit paying an 8% Interest Rate because, to quote Judge Chaffee: “Fraud by Clear and Convincing Evidence.”
Aklufi loses his license in 2014 and Wysocki resigns the Firm from the City Attorney Position in April, 2015.
FBI and Riverside County D.A. conduct raids and Arrest the Expendable Seven, including Aklufi, but not Wysocki.
After the raids Pinkney ‘advises’ Council to bring Wysocki back to continue the bond and construction scam.
For two years Pinkney pays himself for ‘Tolling Agreements’ he created with the Expendable Seven.
After proclaiming that the City was joining with the WRCOG to retrieve the $42 Million TUMF stolen; on June 30, 2017 the Law firm of Slovak Baron Empey Murphy Pinkney files a Civil Law Suit on behalf of the City of Beaumont and Beaumont Finance Authority against Aklufi, Wysocki, and the Law Firm of Aklufi Wysocki.
On October 3, 2017 Council Votes to Stay the Civil Claim after Pinkney explains that his Law Firm can build a case if Aklufi doesn’t confess and tell the everything.
‘Council Approves’ another payout to the Law Firm of Slovak Baron Empey Murphy Pinkney making the amount of money funneled out of Beaumont since 6:30 pm on April 28, 2017 almost $2 Million.
The City did a Press Release claiming that the Western Riverside Council of Governments was joined in the Lawsuit: http://www.recordgazette.net/n…
But it’s two separate lawsuits, one real from the victims and a fake one from the Aklufi’s employee that continues to use its employees’ forged legal documents and illegal practices, which is why Aklufi can’t be sued by the City of Beaumont; the City of Beaumont and Aklufi Wysocki are both DEFENDANTS in the prosecution by State and Feds and in the recovery of funds and reimbursement of the victims.
Case RIC1712036
Original Filing Date:
06/30/2017
Complaint Status:
ACTIVE
1 Plaintiff
CITY OF BEAUMONT
SLOVAK BARON EMPEYMURPHY & PINKNEY
Exempt Agency
2 Plaintiff
BEAUMONT UTILITY AUTHORITY
SLOVAK BARON EMPEYMURPHY & PINKNEY
Exempt Agency
3 Defendant
JOSEPH AKLUFI
GORDON & REES LLP
Served 07/01/2017
4 Defendant
DAVID WYSOCKI
WINGERT GREBING BRUBAKER & JUSKIE LLP
Served 07/05/2017
5 Defendant
AKLUFI & WYSOCKI
WINGERT GREBING BRUBAKER & JUSKIE LLP
Served 07/05/2017
Case RIC 1712036 – Actions/Minutes
FUTURE HEARINGS SCHEDULED:
12/28/2017 8:30 AM DEPT. 04
CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE HEARING
11/09/2017 8:30 AM DEPT. 04
HEARING RESERVED FOR: MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS (SPECIAL APPEARANCE) – RES71734
FILED TODAY:
10/03/2017
HEARING RESERVED SET 11/09/17 AT 8:30 IN DEPT. 04 – RES71734
10/03/2017
COURT REPORTER HEARING FEE FOR ONE HOUR OR LESS PAID BY JOSEPH AKLUFI IN THE AMOUNT OF $30.00; FOR HEARING RESERVED FOR MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS (SPECIAL APPEARANCE) ON 11/09/2017.
10/03/2017
ON-LINE MOTION RESERVED ON BEHALF OF JOSEPH AKLUFI.
Beaumont City Council Transcript October 3, 2017
Report out of Closed Session:
Pinkney: Item 2 was conference with legal counsel regarding pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) City of Beaumont v. Joseph Aklufi, et al. (Riverside County Supervisor Court, Case Number RIC1712036
Pinkney: There was reportable Action taken on that Item. Just a little bit of background. The City has a Civil Lawsuit that it’s filed against Mr. Aklufi and his Law Firm. [Aklufi Wysocki] He’s the former City Attorney for the City of Beaumont. So we have that Civil Case Pending, but Mr. Aklufi has also is a Defendant in a Criminal Case.
Pinkney: He has a 5th Amendment Right not to testify or incriminate himself in the City’s pending Civil Case. As a result; the City will not be able to conduct or complete a thorough discovery to prepare a Civil Case against Mr. Aklufi and his Law Firm and still be entitled to plead the 5th Amendment when his Deposition is taken and other Discovery is conducted.
Pinkney: As such; the Parties in the Civil Case have the option to Stay the Civil Action until completion of the Criminal Case against Mr. Aklufi or further order of the Court. So there was Action taken in Closed Session on that and the Action was to Stay the City’s pending Civil Action until the Criminal against Mr. Aklufi is completed or until there’s further Order of the Court.
Pinkney: The Motion was made to Stay the Action by Mr. Lara and there was a Second by Mr. Martinez and the Vote was Mr. Lara, Yes; Mr. Martinez, Yes; Mayor White, Yes; and Vice-Mayor Carroll, Yes.