Yes!
It appeared in a comment on this blog: Lucas Daniel Smith says that Loren Collins has offered to represent him pro bono in Smith’s defense against extradition from the Dominican Republic to Kenya. I find this a delicious story, full of twists and irony; however, I didn’t want to write an article about it until I had confirmation, and now I have. Collins confirmed to me in an email today that he made the offer of representing Smith, and further that his offer is sincere. (Loren is a straight-up guy as I have known him, and I wouldn’t have expected anything but sincerity from him.)
At this point Smith hasn’t accepted the offer, but said that he would decide by Monday. Since Collins isn’t yet representing Smith, he has no special access to documentation and records; we’re all in the same boat as to our capability of judging whether there is any real Kenyan extradition proceeding in the first place. I wrote about that question in my article: “Why did Bruce Steadman give Lucas Daniel Smith $5,800?”
The initial irony would be Smith saying that he rejected representation because he couldn’t trust Collins, and that’s likely as far as it will go.
Update:
Lucas Smith, among his plethora of new articles, says he accepts Collin’s offer. I didn’t see that coming (I hasten to add that there’s no written agreement between Collins and Smith yet). It raises new interesting questions like how attorney-client privilege works in a case like this, and would Collins would be muzzled even if he found out that the extradition was a hoax, which I still believe it is? On the positive side, Smith is saying that Bruce Steadman will receive copies of all their correspondence which is important because if there is any victim here, it’s Steadman.
I have to give credit where credit is due. Just when you think there’s nothing new under the birther sun, they come up with something.
Update 2:
Smith has posted a draft agreement (which appears rather silly in its inclusion of irrelevancies) that he wrote for Collins’ representation of him. It appears that Smith has been cribbing legal advice here and/or at the Fogbow, based on the final sentence:
This transmission [all email communications] to a third party, i.e., BRUCE STEADMAN, shall not defeat the privilege according Attorney-Client communication.
Well good luck with that.
Update 3:
Obama Conspiracy Theories has learned from the United States Embassy in Santo Domingo that Smith is not facing extradition. I guess that means that the Collins offer was for naught. It was all a hoax on the part of Smith.
I totally missed that thread in late March. That’s one ugly painting. Has Orly said anything about LDS painting a picture with her nipples showing?
I missed the NSFW warning, was it there and I just can’t find it?
While it’s a lead-pipe cinch that Smith will not avail himself of Collins’ services (because Smith has never been to Kenya, there is no actual Kenyan Birf Certificate, Smith is not, in fact, in danger if being deported from his Dominican hideout, and it’s all a scam to deprive Bruce Steadman and anyone else stupid enough to fall for the line of a convicted forger,) it remains to be seen what spurious reason Smith will concoct for rejecting Collins’ generous offer. It’s worth noting that Smith is already trying to impugn Collins’ character by implying there is a nefarious reason for taking a leave from employment, and harping on the fact that Collins is acting in a stage play.
Guess we’re about to find out just how committed LDS is to his lie.
X3
The lead role, even!
Break a leg, Loren!
You took the words out of my mouth.
Kudos to Loren for putting Smith on the spot.
I think, in poker, it’s called put up of shut up. Will be interesting to see where it goes. LDS has bluffed his way through everything so far, admittedly not at all well, but he has done nothing but bluff, and every time he’s been called he has folded and slunk away, and I don’t see any reason that this time will be any different. I have to agree with Doc here, this is a “delicious story”.
He decided to accept the offer. Now how much you wanna bet this extradition thing magically goes away? You know, conveniently before he has to present proof that he’s actually being extradited, or that he’s even been to Kenya?
I would agree that is a credible possibility. This should be interesting to see play out.
I don’t know. From what I red on the internet I don’t trust that Collens guy.
Bull mose party? Nothing to fear but bare markets?
Who be fooling whom?
Well, obviously, Loren is just that good. He may be all wrong on all things birfer, when it comes to extradition, his word is law. The gov’t saw his name entered as defense counsel, and scurried like roaches.
Yep, indeedy. 😉
LDS is a felon, a congenital liar and a sociopath. I’d be very surprised if there was any truth to his Kenyan extradition request story.
Unless of course he committed far more serious crimes in Kenya –assuming he ever was there, of course, which is a big if — such as murder, major robbery with aggravated violence, etc. — the sort of crimes that warrant extradition usually.
The only thing I can come up with is that they decided that he was forging official Kenyan documents with the intent to deceive, which he most certainly was, and decided to come after him for that. I don’t know how seriously they take something like that, but some countries take the forging of gov’t documents rather seriously, and they don’t care where you are hiding. It’s possible that he actually did get himself in trouble in Kenya without ever having actually stepped foot in Kenya. The irony alone would be well worth it, and couldn’t happen to a more deserving little fraud.
While I’d certainly be pleased to see the criminal Smith brought to justice, I seriously doubt that the Kenyan government has any idea who he is; all he’s presented to support his unbelievable scam is a poorly-executed forgery that he couldn’t even bother to have written by an actual Spanish speaker.
The first thing Loren should request is copies of Smith’s passport and travel documents to confirm the dates when Smith was actually in Kenya. Since Smith was never there at all Loren will have an iron clad case for dismissal on all charges.
I would think, that the first thing that Loren would do upon accepting this pig would be to actually see whatever it is that has LDS’s undies in a twist, and if it isn’t as purported, then to run, not walk to the nearest egress. I still think he is scamming someone, just not sure who at the moment. I just think he is congenitally incapable of telling the truth.
It’s a good thing it’s pro bono because no checks, cash, haunted houses, Steadman, kidneys or any other organ will ever be accepted for payment of legal services from the LDS.
Of course this is giving LDS exactly what he wants. Someone (besides Steadman) is paying attention to him.
Birther grifting and narcissism seem to go hand in greasy hand.
As long as the attention consists of pointing out what a transparent liar, forger and grifter he is, possibly preventing anyone beyond Steadman being taken in by the current scam, well, Smith brought it on himself, and I’m OK with that.
I have a cat like that; he can’t differentiate between good attention and bad attention, and prefers being yelled at to being ignored.
Update:
Lucas Smith, among his plethora of new articles, says he accepts Collins’ offer. Hint: A spell check might be useful.
We all know that Smith is going to come up with a way of weaseling out of this.
My question is why Kenya would send an extradition request to the Dominican Republic (a country with which it apparently does not have an extradition treaty) and not send an extradition request to the United States, where Smith is a citizen?
Every prominent birther is after attention. But it gives me what I want too, something halfway interesting to write about.
What in particular did you read that caused you doubt Collins? Or is this just the typical birther empty generality?
Looks like Loren has asked LDS for several docs re the extradition. LDS will have to get busy real quick and create these docs for Loren. Times a wasting.
I guess Loren will finally discover once and far all the truth about Obama’s Kenyan Birth Certificate. But if Loren really honors Attorney – Client privilege he can never devulge the firsthand and private information he learns and is shared by Lucas Smith.
It is interesting. LDS is very rarely mentioned on Birther Report. I would think this story would attract the attention of Birther Report.
So what’s the scenario you see that leads to Loren finding this out?
Perhaps Birther Report censors content related to Smith?
Perhaps this has already occurred but has anyone asked the Kenyan government if it has sought extradition in this case? While all the speculation about this guy’s motives and credibility may be fun, if it makes sense to ask the state of Hawaii if Obama was born there, it would seem to make sense to ask Kenya if Collins is charged with an offense?
No spin here, just asking.
For any lawyers here, when Loren finds out this is all a hoax by LDS, what are the limitations on attorney-client privilege?
Speaking of Birther Report, john, it appears time to acknowledge that birthers will never take your concerns about the CCP seriously, as the following exchange between you and Falcon illustrate:
john: I hope this [post about Michael Shrimpton] isn’t the “Universe Shattering” information. Does it mean we have to wait all way until November 2014 for it to be released?
Falcon: Jimmy Two Shoes – the universe shattering information is that the PDF was not made on a ZeroX 666-7779, but a Lanier 604UCK70UR$3LF. Now scurry back over to Crunts’ and break the news.
That it’s a forgery presented for sale on eBay by a convicted forger?
This is a lie.
Smith can waive the privilege at any time. By long-established Birfer standards, if he refuses to do so, it’s proof he is hiding something.
Why would you think that? They’re running different cons, competing for the same Birfer Bucks. It’s not in the interest of either party to pimp for the other.
While I don’t disagree that this is a valid question, can you tell me under what law, statute, custom or precedent the government of Kenya is required to answer such a question? To whom should such a question be directed? Where does one start?
Hawai’i responding to an official request for verification from an official of another of these United States is not quite the same thing as a sovereign nation being asked to respond to a query from a citizen of an entirely different country, acting in no official capacity, wouldn’t you agree?
Before Loren becomes Smith’s attorney, they first have to sign a retainer agreement. Loren likely would not even offer a retainer agreement without first seeing and verifying the supposed extradition paperwork.
If Loren becomes Smith’s attorney, the attorney’s work product is confidential. Correspondence between Smith and Loren would be confidential. However, I doubt that extradition papers, arrest warrants, etc. would be considered to be confidential.
As Bonsall Obot has said, I wouldn’t know who to write to in Kenya to ask, and I don’t know why Kenya would respond to a request from a mere citizen with no official standing from the United States.
I would imagine that if Loren Collins becomes the attorney for Lucas Smith, he would be able to write to the Kenyan authorities and get a response. Although I suspect that the response would be along the lines of “Who is Lucas Daniel Smith?”
Fair questions.
1. “ [U]nder what law, statute, custom or precedent the government of Kenya is required to answer such a question?
Kenya is not required to answer the question. However, the government of Kenya might want to answer the question if it were being falsely accused of seeking the extradition of an American citizen. Hey, it’s worth a shot.
2. To whom should such a question be directed?
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs: http://www.mfa.go.ke/?q=contact or the Kenyan embassy in the United States: http://www.kenyaembassy.com/contact.html I am sure that the embassy staff will know what agency handles extradition requests and be able to contact them. It would be quicker to ask the embassy or consulate in Santo Domingo but there doesn’t appear to be one. Hmmmm, is that a clue?
3. Where does one start? I would start by explaining that this American is accusing Kenya of charging him with an offence and seeking his extradition with appropriate links to wherever he is making these claims. Maybe a link to this blog to show that at least some people are interested.
For that matter, one could also contact the embassy of the Dominican Republic : legal@us.serex.gov.do and ask if they could confirm that Kenya has requested the extradition of an American citizen from the Dominican Republic or provide a contact to an agency in Santo Domingo who would know.
The worst that can happen is that there is no reply to any inquiry. I don’t see how that makes anyone worse off. It may be off the wall enough to get an answer. I would like to think that neither Kenya nor the Dominican Republic wants to be involved with birtherism and so would respond with the diplomatic version of “Huh? Are you kidding?”
Very nice research; looks like you’re on the right track. I look forward to hearing what kind of responses you get.
Stern has an answer to this at TFB: http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2289&start=2025#p604563 .
Bonsall Obot:
If I were interested whether there was an extradition or not, I would have contacted Kenya and the Dominican Republic and reported the results, if any.. I am not and I haven’t. What I asked was why no one here who wants to know the answer to that question has not done that. It takes five, maybe ten minutes to do the ‘research’. Instead, a bunch of laymen are learning about attorney-client privilege. I suppose that does answer my question.
I can’t speak for others, but for me, given Lucas Smith’s history as a liar and felon, and the absurdity of his claim, any effort to fact-check his story seemed a waste of time. It’s Lucas’ responsibility to provide objective evidence to prove that what he said happened actually occurred. Until he does that, given his previous record for dishonesty, it’s fair to assume he’s lying.
Why should anyone here lift a finger to investigate the ravings of a convicted felon who has refused to ever provide any documentary evidence requested of him?
In the past Lucas Smith has repeatedly been asked to provide proof that he has ever set foot in Kenya, proof which has never been forthcoming. He is a convicted forger and swindler.
Consequently, I have no interest in proving that his story about fighting extradition to Kenya is just another of his fantasies. If he wants us to believe that his story is true, let him produce the evidence.
I still say it’s all lies and fabrications and LDS is just stringing Loren Collins along.
There are a few interesting twists in this relationship. First off all, an attorney is prohibited from allowing his services to be used to assist in a clients fraud. So if our self admitted child molester friend is milking anyone for “bail” and now trying to use an attorney’s services to continue this fraud, the attorney must withdraw. An attorney can defend a client against a past fraud, but cannot allow is services to be used to further an on-going fraud. So if Collins mysterously withdraws, and speaks nothing further, that very well may be a telling sign.
Another thing to pay attention to is attorney-client privilege belongs to the client. If the client divulges the contents of those communications, to any third party, he was waived the privilege to the whole world. LDS’s statement that he will provide Steadman with all correspondence very well may constitute such a waiver (I’m sure there may be some arguments that Steadman is covered, as he footed the supposed bail money…but the question is who would be seeking disclosure of privileged communications). That doesn’t mean that Collins will start speaking freely on the subject, but it does mean LDS’s communications are not protected from discovery (the question is who would then be litigating against him to get the communications…I don’t see Steadman doing it, even if he discovers he’s been defrauded).
And if LDS starts making false statements about his “case” Collins will also probably be required to withdraw from the representation. I really don’t feel like doing the research as to what are the attorney’s responsibilities to correct his public statements, but we’re going back to the question of is an attorney’s services being used to continue an on-going fraud. And here’s one more point to remember, when a client divuleges an attorney-client communication, the waiver isn’t limited to that one conversation. It’s will generally be considered waived to the whole subject matter.
This should be fairly interesting to follow…although it very well might just suddenly disappear from LDS topics of conversation, never to be heard of again.
“On the positive side, Smith is saying that Bruce Steadman will receive copies of all their correspondence which is important because if there is any victim here, it’s Steadman.”
It may well be that Steadman is a victim. This arrangement, however, blows the attorney/client privilege out of the water.
I don’t think Loren would violate it, Steadman and Lucas could. Any of those communications, oral or written, are fair game for disclosure to anyone having or seeking access to them in any legal proceeding.
And while the privilege belongs to the client, no attorney should ever agree to such an arrangement. If Lucas wishes to reveal attorney/client-privileged information, he’s free to do so.
And I say again because it should never be forgot: by Birfers’ own long-established standards, if Lucas stands on the privilege and refuses to disclose any information, it is an admission that he is hiding something. By Birfer standards, he is admitting wrongdoing.
Update 2:
Smith has posted a draft agreement (which appears rather silly in its inclusion of irrelevancies) that he wrote for Collins’ representation of him. It appears that Smith has been cribbing legal advice here and/or at the Fogbow, based on the final sentence:
Well good luck with that.
Indeed.
The proposed retainer says it is confidential. Which is why Smith published it to the world.
Smith is just playing chicken with Loren.
Of course he is. He has no intention of letting Loren mess up his latest little scam. I am surprised Loren would interact with such a con artist. I see nothing to gain.
Agree. Smith does things like this because he’s a grifter and he thinks he’s going to outsmart Loren. But why is Loren playing along?
Something isn’t right about this.
—-
First of all, lawyers draft their own retainer agreements because, well, they are lawyers. Second, it is a completely ludicrous document.
I agree. If you lie down with Lucas, you get up with fleas.
Loren is a big boy.
It really is a silly agreement, that shows, big surprise, a birther doesn’t have any clue about the law. First off, simply stating in an agreement that something doesn’t count as a waiver of attorney-client privilege doesn’t make it any less a waiver. There are reasons sharing attorney-client communications with third parties wouldn’t constitute a waiver, and there are ways to work that into an agreement. Just saying, “it doesn’t count” isn’t one of them. If it is a waiver, that clause will not protect him.
Secondly, I have never seen a retainer agreement that limits what an attorney can do in defense of their client. I’m not entirely sure that an attorney can agree to that under the rules of professional conduct. And why exactly would a client want to tie his attorney’s hands even before the representation began.
Just more birth craziness/stupidity.
Is Mr. Loren licensed to practice law in the Dominican Republic?
I never doubted that. As you said earlier at least it is providing a bit of new entertainment in an otherwise dry spell for Birther news..
Loren Collins has been a competent, insightful, patient and steadfast watchdog overlooking the Birther phenomenon since the very beginning.
Even though the Birthers have proven grotesquely incompetent, their extreme posturing and naive misunderstanding of Law combine to form a potential lunatic-incubating milieu for lone-wolf assassin candidates that deserves the attention of serious observers including those famliar with the Law. I’m confident that Loren has not entered into this arrangement without reasons that serve sanity and the REAL defense of our Constitution. (Thanks, Loren!)
Yes, I’m sure he was well-intentioned when he agreed to assist the birthers in GA with the drafting of the original petition in the now infamous M.T. Chair case.
We all know what a FUBAR that turned into. I don’t expect this will be much different. And it’s too bad. But birthers gotta birth and con artists and liars have to grift and con. Good intentions won’t change that here, just as they didn’t in GA.
And I’m sure Mr. Smith didn’t even realize that was a ramification.
Has Loren ever commented on whether, in retrospect, he considers his involvement in that fiasco to have been a good idea?
I don’t doubt it; however, I remain doubtful that one can have close dealings with LDS without being slimed.
As far as I know, Loren has never commented on his ghost-lawyering for Mr. Farrar at all.
This is actually the first I’ve heard of that. Interesting.
Anyway, I think that he is posting on Lucas’s blog as that was the only way that Lucas would communicate with him (becasue Lucas wants traffic to his blog to inflate his Penis,) and he is doing it as he wants to show Steadman how full of bovine excrement Daniels is.
Not that I think this is a wise course of action necessarily, but I think that’s the reason here.
I think LDS will string Loren on and Loren will depart with a statement like “look, even when offered competent representation from a real lawyer the guy refuses to play ball. There’s obviously nothing here. If he was in real trouble he would jump at this and you know it. Instead he did everything he could to stop it, stuff that no guy in trouble would do. He’s lying and you should be able to see that now.”
This was a comment at he, Lucas Smith’s blog:
You beat me to it
Off his rocker? Kinda’ true of every birther, isn’t it?
Well that is true. But some are even more than others.
More crazy nonsense from WND…And that is saying a lot…
WorldNetDaily Now Hopes Edward Snowden Will Vindicate The Birther Movement
WorldNetDaily reporter Jerome Corsi, a leader of the birther movement, is enthralled by Michael Shrimpton, a British “self-proclaimed intelligence expert” who claims that Edward Snowden possesses evidence proving that Stanley Ann Dunham is not President Obama’s real mother and that Obama was actually born in Kenya.
In his article, “Obama’s Origins Resurface At Intel Expert’s Trial,” Corsi claims that Shrimpton has the latest birther bombshell: “Edward Snowden, as part of his negotiations to leave Hong Kong, agreed to deliver to Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow the classified U.S. military intelligence file on Obama’s DNA,” revealing that Obama was “born in Mombasa, Kenya, in about 1960” and “establishing that Stanley Ann Dunham was not Obama’s biological mother.”
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/worldnetdaily-now-hopes-edward-snowden-will-vindicate-birther-movement
i would say this is more of a NOT DONE DEAL than a DONE DEAL. Based on LDS’s proposed retainer agreement, there is no way that Loren could possibly represent him, since he would be barred from verifying or even checking anything that Smith comes up with, and I just don’t seeing him taking it on under those conditions. I think this is probably the opening salvo of LDS trying to get out of the corner he waxed himself in to.
… and trying to make it look like Collins walked away, in order to look like a victim to his cash cow Steadman & others.
So Smith now has posted a brief video allegedly of his Dominican Republic deportation hearing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39Z285rcQsc
I would appreciate someone who speaks Spanish giving us the gist of what’s happening.
I notice that his name isn’t mentioned in the video nor Kenya or extradition, deportation, etc So anything that can prove his original claim is absent from the video.
Funny enough, YouTube suggested 4 (German) videos in the “suggestion” column next to this, one of which was “How to easily manipulate people”. 😉
Although I admittedly used the wrong term in a sleepy haze yesterday; there is a BIG difference between deportation and extradition.
Smith’s claim that he is being extradited is, of course, not credible, and is nothing but a scam to milk Steadman or anyone else credulous enough to fall for such a transparent fabrication.
But it is very easy to believe that a country of which he is not a citizen would be willing to deport him. He is a known and admitted criminal.
I sent the link to a friend who is fluent in Spanish.
A first pass at this (I speak Spanish but am not native.) It sounds like a judge talking to a man named Rafael Jesus . Nothing about Kenya, extradition, etc. But you already knew that, right?
senor, su nombre completo por favor.
– Sir, your full name please.
rafael jesus arau(?)
– Rafael Jesus Arau(?)
rafael usted a que se dedica?
– Rafael, what do you do for a living?
yo soy tapicero de interior
– I am an upholsterer of interior
tapicero?
– upholsterer?
si senor.
– Yes, sir.
solamente se dedica a eso?
– Is that all you do for a living?
no yo soy dirigente comunitario y soy un ofical de la policia comunitaria y alla en el mismo banco
– No, I’m a community director, and an official in the community police and there on the same bench OR there in the same bank.
The rest is hard to catch, but it seems like he’s being asked how long he has been doing certain activities.
Farrar was such an honest guy who promised to give up birthing as soon as the Georgia court had spoken (against him). Well, some people only seem to be honest ….
My bi-lingual friend’s take on the YouTube video:
“It’s super hard to understand. He speaks with a thick accent – Caribbean most likely (Cuban, Dominican or Puerto Rican).
His name is Rafael de Jesus _________ could not catch last name. It sounded something like Aragon or De La o. He worked as an upholsterer and police official – something to do with Italy. The judge asked him the dates that he worked in these jobs. He was an upholsterer since 1990, then as a police official in 1996. That is all I could understand. It’s a poor recording.”
It looks like another Lucas Smith scam. He walked into a courtroom, sat down and recorded a snippet of a court hearing which had nothing to do with him, and then tried to pass it off as his extradition hearing.
I think Loren should be made privy to this info.