cross-posted via Clouded Titles


(OSCEOLA COUNTY, FLORIDA) — In what appears to be a “cut and paste” and “fill in the blanks” form type of Correspondence from Gilbert Garcia Group, P.A., one of the alleged suspect “actors” that was named in the OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION has sent a letter, dated September (fill in the blank, handwritten), 2015, ordering the Clerk to remove the Forensic Examination conducted by DK Consultants LLC and all related links to the website, including the Clerk’s warnings about committing document fraud on the land records, under threat of libel per se.

The letter also acknowledges that the Report contains “unsupported defamatory rumors about the Gilbert Garcia Group, P.A. and other law firms actively engaged in default servicing and foreclosure litigation.”  The Circuit Clerk of Osceola County, Hon. Armando Ramirez, vows to take this fight all the way to the Department of Justice in Washington and has asked this poster to “get the word out” that this sort of threatening behavior will not go unchallenged.

First, IF the law firm did bring suit, it would have to prove before a jury that the “Defendant (the Clerk) published a false statement”.  This means that all means of discovery can now be employed by the Clerk to get at the heart of the alleged suspect behaviors named in the Report.   We intend to invite the DOJ into the proceedings, so they can examine the documents and start their criminal investigation into Gilbert Garcia Group’s alleged manufacture of documents that were used in reliance of foreclosure pleadings filed with the Courts in Osceola County, Florida which were named in the Report as being suspect.    If the “third party” that the alleged “false statements” is the Department of Justice, the Gilbert Garcia Group, P.A. and all other entities named in the Report as suspect “actors” have a lot more to worry about than a Cease and Desist Order.   There is no defamation if the statements are true.

All the author has to do is point to the behaviors of David J. Stern and Marshall C. Watson, which have wreaked havoc on their practices (including the disbarment of Stern by the Florida Supreme Court), to exemplify that the statements made in the Report would not have been made had there not been some reasonable belief that Gilbert Garcia Group’s employees and attorneys were not exempt from alleged RICO-style behaviors.  The theft of a property (using false or misrepresentative documents) under Florida law carries up to a 5-year prison term just on that count alone.  All other penal codes (for perjury, fraud on the court, notary fraud, forgery, etc.), not including the federal codes 18 USC 1341 and 1343 (mail fraud and wire fraud), in addition to 18 USC 371 (conspiracy to defraud the United States), at some point would apply to criminal proceedings brought against the actors listed as “suspect” in the report.

Gilbert Garcia further claims that the Clerk’s publishing the Report constitutes “illegal conduct”, when they have asserted libel per se, which is civil conduct, not criminal.

Further, in an apparent attempt to “arm twist” the Clerk, the letter was also sent to the Osceola County attorney and the Board of County Commissioners of Osceola County, who were NOT involved in the procurement or release of the Report.  This appears to make it “open season” on Gilbert Garcia Group, P.A., because now … the letter has also been forwarded to Congressman Alan Grayson.  Potentially, this letter will make its way to the halls of justice in DC and Gilbert Garcia Group, P.A., whose name appears at the top of the suspect assignments that are in fact, recorded in the real property records of Osceola County, Florida, will be under scrutiny by the feds.

In my book, this letter amounts to more than nothing but a terroristic threat against a Clerk that is trying to stand up for the people of Osceola County, Florida.  As the letter indicated (on Page 2), there was no apparent “due diligence in verifying the truthfulness of the reported claims”.   Apparently, the Gilbert Garcia Group, P.A. doesn’t understand that FOIA Requests to release the Report trump the firm’s allegations of libel per se.

The verifications of the information contained in the Report are not completed as of yet.  In fact, they were at one time, being investigated by the Osceola County Sheriff’s Department, however, nothing has come of it because this poster believes that unless you knew what to look for and could talk to witnesses that wouldn’t have to fear being tasered or falsely arrested, they would not know what to look for.   This Report is indeed a political hot potato and now here we have a law firm that doesn’t understand that a filing Plaintiff has the burden of proof to show that the statements were defamatory and that the Clerk intended to defame them and further, the Clerk is entitled to discovery, even though he is not involved in a private right of action, to show how much involvement Gilbert Garcia Group had in manufacturing the suspect documents timed to coincide with their filing of the suspect litigation to foreclose on Osceola County property owners without legitimate proof, but rather “with made up, uncorroborated falsehoods”, which are not so much the matter for the civil realm, but more towards the federal grand jury that we believe will eventually start to investigate the contents of this Report to determine whether the allegations are true or not.

Remember, Gilbert Garcia Group … the Clerk gets discovery against you, including depositions of all those who participated in your document manufacturing.  The Clerk (I will bet) will have the watchful eye of the feds on everything going down in this suit.

To illustrate my point, let’s look at charges just filed against a Deputy Clerk for document manufacturing …  taylor_indictment  … this is three counts, including mail fraud.  Let’s enlighten the Gilbert Garcia Group (“GGG”), shall we?

  1. The conviction rate on mail fraud charges (18 USC 1341) is 95% for the prosecution.  All one has to do is look at the Devitt & Blackmar’s Jury Instructions on mail fraud to find what statement the judge will use in court to the jury in a criminal trial (maybe yours GGG?): “One does not have to contemplate the use of the mails to be charged with mail fraud.”    What do you think your chances are of surviving charges like that?   Slim, at best.
  2. Now let’s talk about wire fraud (18 USC 1343) … Did you (as a law firm) wire documents into the Clerk’s Office by electronic filing?   If you did, you’re now at risk!
  3. Did you rely on these documents at trial?   If you maintained these documents were accurate when they were manufactured using false and misrepresentative statements … we now have the trifecta … perjury, wire fraud (or mail fraud), your choice, plus a myriad of other charges including RICO on both state and federal levels.

What most law firms do not understand is that attorneys are held to a higher standard.  If they are involved in wrongdoing, they get busted just like the robosigners do.   Disbarment and imprisonment are not pretty pictures, especially when you have to pay restitution on top of that!

The investigation is not over yet GGG, but if you want to “speed things up”, file the libel per se suit.   We have a bevy of criminal investigators watching on the federal level! Do you want to take that chance?   The American people and the Citizens of Osceola County, Florida want to know:  ARE YOU GUILTY?

Is that a “happy smiley face” under the “M” on the signature line on Page 3 of that letter?  I wonder.


cross-posted via Clouded Titles

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



This post was written by:

- who has written 9281 posts on FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA.

CONTROL FRAUD | ‘If you don’t look; you don’t find, Wherever you look; you will find’ -William Black

Contact the author


  1. Geoff says:

    FINALLY FINALLY some goverment employee in finance and records willing to stand for the homeowner. GOOD work Dave Kreiger, keep the fire stoked!!!


Leave a Reply

Advertise your business on


Please Support Me!

All Of These Are Troll Comments