The McCauley/Phillips Civil Harassment Restraining Order hearings recently took place Friday July 22, 2016 and Friday July 29, 2016 in Sacramento Superior Court.
If you aren’t fully up to speed please read the previous posts titled Todd Matthew Phillips Served Civil Harassment Restraining Order and Kimberly McCauley’s CIVIL HARASSMENT RESTRAINING ORDER as they contain valuable fact based information.
McCauley’s July 22, 2016 Permanent Restraining Order – Civil Harassment Hearing began with a surprise Court Call from Revolt Revoke Restore attorney Todd Matthew Phillips.
Below is a SYNOPSIS:
Clerk: “Your honor, Mr. Phillips is appearing on Court Call.””
Judge Raoul Thorbourne: “Oh…is it Mr. Phillips himself?”
Clerk: “Correct. On Court Call.”
Judge Raoul Thorbourne: “Oh…Ok. Mr. Phillips are you there?”
Todd Matthew Phillips: “Good morning your honor. May it please the court, to get right to the point, I wish to specially appear to contest jurisdiction.”
Judge Raoul Thorbourne: “I had an issue regarding whether or not there was jurisdiction over you and some other things so I sent her off to properly serve you and she appears to have done that.” (McCauley raises her hand) “Yes, Ms. McCauley…”
Kimberly McCauley: “I have actually looked up the jurisdiction issue since we last spoke and you absolutely have jurisdiction over Mr. Phillips. He meets the criteria for minimum contacts in the state of California.”
Judge Raoul Thorbourne: “Minimum contacts. That’s the Constitutional law!”
Long story short, Phillips proceeds, under oath, to tell the judge the following: “She did not serve me.” “She drove from Sacramento to Las Vegas to personally confront me but she did not effectuate personal service.” “She came to my home.” “This is someone who pretends to be afraid of me.” “She drove 700 miles I know it was her because I saw her at the home where she believes I live.” “She came to confront me with her husband.” “I have pictures of the event.” “She was holding in a dish, a casserole dish, covered with tin foil, she was pretending to have a lawsuit under there.”
McCauley’s response: “I was never in Las Vegas.” “I don’t know how he can claim he wasn’t served when he’s on a call right now and knows there is a restraining order!” “He’s claiming he wasn’t served on a call for a permanent restaining order!” “He’s an attorney, he should know better!” “I never set foot in Las Vegas.” “I haven’t left Sacramento.”
McCauley’s points were apparently well received as nearly the ENTIRE courtroom began to laugh.
Judge Raoul Thorbourne “My tentative ruling, by the way, is Mr. Phillips was properly served.” “The TRO will remain in effect for one more week.”
Todd Matthew Phillips: (Attempts to speak…)
Judge Raoul Thorbourne: “STOP Phillips STOP!”
Todd Matthew Phillips: “I have a right of free speech.”
Judge Raoul Thorbourne: “WRONG Mr. Phillips!” “Mr. Phillips, the more you try to address or contact or post anything involving Ms. McCauley then the MORE strongly I feel I should issue the order so just cease and desist.”
Judge Raoul Thorbourne then continued the hearing until July, 29, 2016 to “thrash out the issue of service.”
McCauley’s July 29, 2016 Permanent Restraining Order – Civil Harassment Hearing began much like the previous July 22, 2016 hearing. Here are a few key highlights.
Judge Raoul Thorbourne: “OK… now I’m going to call the matter of Kimberly McCauley and Todd Phillips.” “Mr. Phillips, are you there sir?”
Todd Matthew Phillips: “Yes, I’m specially appearing today to contest jurisdiction your honor.”
Judge Raoul Thorbourne: “Oh very good … by the way Mr. Phillips, I heard that you called my clerk the other day and that you expressed… you actually told her you were not sure why… what this hearing was about this morning. I found that surprising.” “My review of the records and what Ms. McCauley testified to earlier I think that a pattern of cyberstalking has been… there is more than enough evidence to establish that.” “Ms. McCauley you had indicated that your brother-in-law had served Mr. Phillips.”
Kimberly McCauley: “Yes, my brother-in-law dropped off documents on his porch.” (The USPS also delivered.)
Todd Matthew Phillips: “I just want to say… if it pleases the court… I wish to say… if I could please…”
Judge Raoul Thorbourne: “Wait…Wait…Wait…before you talk, first I need you to be sworn in.”
Todd Matthew Phillips: “I raise my right hand. I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but.”
Clerk: “Let me swear you in Mr. Phillips.” “Do you solemnly state that the testimony you are about to give in the matter now pending before the court will be the truth so help you god?”
Todd Matthew Phillips: “Yes.”
Kimberly McCauley: “I do have one other thing.”
Judge Raoul Thorbourne: “OK…go ahead…”
Kimberly McCauley: “I did some more research on the issue of service.”
Todd Matthew Phillips: “I dispute jurisdiction of course because I have not been served.” “I know that she may eventually publish and I know I will eventually be served…why don’t we set a trial date 30 days out.” “She is a public figure.” “I can prove that.” “Everything is fair comment” “This is why we need to have a trial… so I can show the court all of her videos, all of her postings, her newspaper articles, her blog that she keeps.”
WAIT A MINUTE! “her blog that she keeps.”
How did my blog magically morph into McCauley’s blog? Odd considering Phillips sent me the following threat via Facebook Messenger on July 2, 2016.
FYI: Phillips has also posted false defamatory statements about me without remorse but I digress.
Anyway, during McCauley’s July 29th hearing Judge Raoul Thorbourne ultimately said, “Based upon all that I have heard… I’m going to make a finding of fact right now, that you were in fact properly served.”
McCauley’s next Permanent Restraining Order – Civil Harassment hearing is scheduled for 08/26/2016 at 9:00 am in Department 40 at Gordon D. Schaber Courthouse where the issue of jurisdiction will be discussed in greater detail.
Let’s quickly review:
1.) “She did not serve me.”
2.) “She drove from Sacramento to Las Vegas to personally confront me but she did not effectuate personal service.”
3.) “She came to my home.”
4.) “This is someone who pretends to be afraid of me.”
5.) “She drove 700 miles I know it was her because I saw her at the home where she believes I live.”
6.) “She came to confront me with her husband.”
7.) “I have pictures of the event.”
8.) “She was holding in a dish, a casserole dish, covered with tin foil, she was pretending to have a lawsuit under there.”
9.) “her blog that she keeps“
California Penal Code section 118 defines perjury as: “Every person who, having taken an oath that he or she will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly before any competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any of the cases in which the oath may by law of the State of California be administered, willfully and contrary to the oath, states as true any material matter which he or she knows to be false, and every person who testifies, declares, deposes or certifies under penalty of perjury in any of the cases in which the testimony, declarations, depositions, or certification is permitted by law of the State of California under penalty of perjury and willfully states as true any material matter which he or she knows to be false, is guilty of perjury.”
Perjury is a felony in California.