The Tavern Chat Podcast - Episode #57 - Dramatic Reading of #ConManKen Emails (Transcript included with post)

#ConManKen. Never going to let you go. Never going to say goodbye ;)

I was given access to an email exchange between Kenny and the "white night" suing him, Louis Desy. With permission, I recorded a "dramatic" version of the exchange to today's podcast episode and have included the email exchange below for those not looking to listen (or who do listen and want to catch all the spelling and grammar issues ;)

Ah, #ConManKen. He never ceases to entertain. In this episode I "dramatically" read an email chain between Kenny and the man suing him in a New York court.

Link to Episode #57 -   https://anchor.fm/tavernchat/episodes/Episode-57---Dramatic-Reading-of-ConManKen-Emails-e1pn4n

On Mon, Jul 2, 2018, 2:21 PM Louis J Desy Jr wrote:

Hi,

I assume you got the same notice on docket with a document filed by the court clerk, document #31, that I did, about the preliminary conference for Aug 01, 2018 about case schedule and deadlines; so unless something changes with the schedule, it looks like I will get to meet you in person finally.

I sent all of the papers and exhibits to be served on Kickstarter PBC to a process server over the weekend, so they should be served by the end of this week, so they should be there also.


On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 9:53 AM, Ken Whitman wrote:

And why would I take advice from a disbarred lawyer.

Or get operated on by a medical doctor who lost his license?

Or a pilot who lost his license

Or someone with no driver's licence telling me how to drive a car.

You are a special kind of stupid.


On Wed, Jul 4, 2018, 10:48 AM Louis J Desy Jr wrote:

IF you did any research on the rules of civil procedure or how to conduct a lawsuit, you would have easily come across that in the rules of civil procedure for the court, and normally, most people would have looked them up to ensure they were following the proper format and what they needed to be put into an answer.

I even TOLD YOU what to look out for in filing your answer, and you choose to ignore it anyway. ( As a side note, so if I DON'T want you to do something, I just have to recommend it to you and you will not do it? )

Now, it is true I was not doing this as to be completely altruistic. Part of my motivation on telling you that anything that would be considered an affirmative defense on an issue in the case needed to be put in as part of the answer or considered waived, is so that months from now you couldn't try to claim that 'you didn't know that' and wanted time to amend or revise your answer.

I am stunned that part of your submission was a photo of what you were citing to, even though a searchable PDF could have been easily made, which is typical since it makes is easier to search for phrases or words in the document and exhibits.

I am also surprised that you did not at least consult with a lawyer to see what they could do for you. Of course, most lawyers probably would have recommended that you just turn over the footage and provide an accounting; and you can't do that if you want to extort more from people.

Louis


On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 11:31 AM, Ken Whitman wrote:

If your do smart, how did you get disbared? Can you answer me that?



On Wed, Jul 4, 2018, 1:59 PM Louis J Desy Jr wrote:

You should put that in one of your motions or the answer.

Of course, the problem here is this case is NOT about what I did or did not do, the issue is how YOU conned about seven hundred people out of tens of thousands of dollars, ran more projects as part of an overall Ponzi scheme, and then refused to deliver what little you did do.

Louis.


On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Ken Whitman wrote:

Con means never doing any work, I spent every bit of money on the show and you know it.

You can ask Jolly, even he know I spent that money on his project.

Proving me inept will be easy because I was in over my head.  Proving I'm a crook who intentional took money gonna be a stretch for anyone except disbared lawyers with a white night complex.

And if you think for one moment that bring up your history followed by harrastment charge won't weigh on a judge's decision, then you truly are rather dumb.

I can't wait to see more post about me on line, once again proving I cant even make a living to finish my kickstarters because of harrasment like this.

Make my job easy,

Happy 4th

Ken


On Wed, Jul 4, 2018, 5:41 PM Louis J Desy Jr wrote:

I have no proof of what you spent the money on because you refuse to provide any accounting.

The only logical reason you refuse to provide a complete accounting as required under the Kickstarter terms is because you spent the money on others things, yourself and/or other projects as part of the Ponzi scheme that you ran and continued after you fled Kentucky.

You can't finish the Kickstarters because you refuse to work on them.

As one small example, you could turn over all of the footage, that would cost nothing and you are obligated to do so, but you refuse to do so until a court orders you to do it; and even then I think you will continue to try to refuse to follow a valid court order.

Louis.


On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 6:25 PM, Ken Whitman wrote:

I don't need a lecture, I don't need advice, I don't need you to try to tell me what you believe your reality is, what I need for you is to talk to me about important information about our court case, or give a place that I can send and or wire my money, or shut the f*** up.


From: Louis J Desy Jr: Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 8:29 PM

Well, at least I didn’t chastise you for all of your spelling and grammar errors.

And as I said and posted before, if I was only looking for $250, I would have filed my case in small claims court. The fact that I filed the case in district court clearly means that I am looking for the other items, which I keep asking for, all of which was in the 30 day demand letter, asked for in the complaint and repeated in multiple emails with you.

Louis.