Thursday, January 15, 2009

What Kurt Zimmerman Really Said

Yesterday we discussed Susan Henderson's futile attempt this week to bury the testimony and findings of what we're calling the Deuxamis Trial. Her efforts met with predictable failure as such requests rarely meet with success in the State of California. Even the records of most divorce cases remain open to public scrutiny despite the obvious painful personal aspects of such things.

And besides, shouldn't being found liable in a trial have at least some consequences? And wouldn't society being allowed to freely examine the evidence of one's now proven malfeasance be among them? Would it really make any sense for a Court to deny the public knowledge of what exactly it was that sank the defendant? Of course not. It's not like you lose your case and the very next day everything goes back to the way it was. Susan's quest here was absurd from the start and stone cold dead on arrival.

The first item on the list Susan Henderson attempted to supply to the Superior Court in hopes of obtaining an injunction on trial testimony and findings was the following:

"Information was leaked to the Sierra Madre Mayor who announced at a televised Council Meeting that the City of Sierra Madre should be hesitant to continue its contract with the Mountain Views Observer because he had received information that 'an adverse ruling against the paper' had been made that would effect the contractual relationship between Grace Lorraine Publications, Inc., owner of the Mountain Views Observer and the City of Sierra Madre."

As discussed yesterday, this was included in the 7 page document that Ms. Henderson would have given to the Superior Court had they been willing to accept it. And Ms. Henderson did note in this document that she was making her claims with the understanding there could be legal consequences should she be found to have perjured herself. So in light of all this, is what she said here about the Mayor of Sierra Madre really true?

Here is what Mayor Kurt Zimmerman actually said at the City Council meeting in question. This transcription was taken directly from a video tape of the meeting.

"I was advised this afternoon that a trial involving the newspaper concluded with the Court indicating that it was going to make some adverse findings and enter judgement against the defendant and I would request that the City Attorney obtain a copy of any judgement or order issued by the Court to clarify whether that judgement or order would have impact on our contract with the newspaper."

Note the clear difference. In Ms. Henderson's statement to the court she claimed the Mayor had publicly concluded that the verdict in this case "would effect the contractual relationship" between the City and her paper. But by reading the transcript of Kurt Zimmerman's statement we can see that this is decidedly false. What he did say was that he wanted the City Attorney to examine the Court documents and make sure everything was still in order, and to make certain that the City's legal advertising needs would not be put into jeopardy by the decision. In other words, this was simply a call for due diligence.

In light of what we've seen here it seems obvious that Ms. Henderson's claim to the Superior Court is not true. And had her statement been examined by the Superior Court this could have been easily discovered.

One other thing. Susan's conspiratorial claim to the Court that "information was leaked to the Sierra Madre Mayor" is nonsense. Trials in the United States of America are open to all, and members of our community attended this one. And nobody swears people to secrecy when they go into a courtroom to attend a public trial. They're allowed to talk to anyone about anything they've seen or heard. After all, and as Susan Henderson once said in a completely different context, this is still a free country.


  1. Mayor Zimmerman had an obligation to request that our city attorney, Sandy Levin, obtain a copy of the verdict. The city council that night was discussing the contract with MVO, it was an agenda item!
    Mayor Kurt Zimmerman is a brilliant trial lawyer, a former Federal Prosecutor. He is obligated to protect the city (including Susan Henderson) and obviously thought it prudent to request Sandy Levin review the verdict. They needed the official ruling.
    Susan, after telling all the Kiwanis Club people she had "won" the case, stormed into the council chambers and proceeded to threaten the Mayor and the City.
    I would guess, the Mayor and/or other councilmembers probably heard of Susan's "story" to the Kiwanis on how she won the case. Her story was made HER.
    The Kiwanis innocently believed her. Don't feel badly Kiwanis, we all fell for this woman's bs.
    Thank you, Mayor Zimmerman for doing the right thing, as usual.

  2. Mayor Zimmerman:
    Kurt Zimmerman's city website bio.

    Kurt Zimmerman is the Mayor of the City of Sierra Madre. He was elected to the City Council in April 2006 and became Mayor in 2008.

    Currently, he is an Assistant General Counsel for a large corporation focusing on envirornmental law and real estate transactions. Prior to that, he was a partner at a large law firm in Los Angeles. In addition, he was an Assistant United States Attorney, a Trial Attorney with the United States Department of Justice (Environment & Natural Resources Division), and an Attorney-Advisor for Natural Resources with the United States Department of Commerce.

    He has authored numerous articles on environmental law and policy and was recognized as a Southern California Super Lawyer in Super Lawyers Magazine.

    Mr. Zimmerman received his BA and MA degrees from Stanford University and his JD degree from the UCLA School of Law. He has been a member of community service, philanthropic and professional organizations

    I think we can all be confident this man will do the right things for Sierra Madre!

  3. How can anyone trust a newspaper whose publisher constantly lies?

  4. No matter what the politics are of various people in Sierra Madre, Susan Henderson is not an asset to any side. I would go further in saying that, if she is on your side - Buyer Beware.

  5. Can the city do business with an enterprise whose owner commits perjury and fraud?

  6. Thanks, Sir Eric. Clarity and specificity - nothing like it!

  7. Do we know for a fact that the court didn't accept Susan's document?

  8. You know Susan Henderson......
    It's one thing to be a deadbeat, to cheat the Dunns,write bad checks to people and never make them good, cheat the Democratic Party, lie to the Kiwanis, etc.
    It's even worse to tell a poor woman you owe $700 to for cleaning your house, cleaning your toilets, etc....."ME NO MONEY" and hang up on her. I'll bet you laughed, didn't you? You are a real piece of work, Henderson.
    Let's ADD RACIST to the list of your disgusting way you treat people.

  9. Dear Curly - yes it is a fact. You can verify this with the court if you would like. The research attorney said the case is "closed."

  10. Curly--You can check the civil register for this case. It is a public record and shows all the documents filed in any given case.

    Well, thanks for the transcript of the Mayor's comments, Sir Eric. I was pretty clear on what the Mayor had said, but I especially loved hearing her use of the word "leaked" like a public trial is a big secret and the public is duty bound to keep it all quiet because she doesn't like the outcome? Give me a break. This woman's reality is very distorted. And while we're at it, I'm sick of those stupid editorials using "dictionary" definitions that she then revises and uses as a springboard for her ridiculous rants.

  11. Susan has flip flopped on every aspect of her life. She probably doesn't know what she is or belives.

  12. Undisclosed RecipientJanuary 15, 2009 at 12:13 PM

    Susan just follows the money. Nothing she says means anything.

  13. This comment has been removed by the author.