Tumgik
#Kamyar Jahan
godsoflust-x · 2 years
Text
Tumblr media
21 notes · View notes
visionvulk · 2 years
Text
#SashaRoiz #mrsasharoiz on Instagram. Beguiling Barcelona. July '22. Enjoying his vacation with his pal Kamyar Jahan
7 notes · View notes
Text
new ‘9-1-1’ 4x06 behind the scenes pics
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
kamyar jahan as izzy chainz
43 notes · View notes
Photo
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
Obscure Marvel fancast of the day: The Great Khali, Mustafa Ali, Kamyar Jahan,  Mahesh Jadu, or Thakur Anoop Singh as Monsoon aka Aloba Dastoor! (Note: Monsoon is of Indian heritage. His mother is most likely Parsi, an Indian ethnic group of Persian heritage, while his father is most likely another Indian group, probably Marathi or Gujarati. Mustafa Ali is half Indian and half Pakistani, while Kamyar Jahan is Persian.) Aloba Dastoor was a mutant who could control the weather, much like Storm, though he was far less prominent a character, only appearing in two issues of X-Factor during the 1990s. He was the younger brother of Radha Dastoor aka Haven, a wealthy human woman who was a philanthropist, pacifist, and advocate for mutant acceptance who unfortunately also got possessed by an entity of evil and was trying to destroy the world as a result. Aloba, who had grown up knowing his sister as a wise, gentle, all-compassionate person, was confused by her turn to terrorism. At first, he followed her and did her bidding in her mad cause due to his hero-worship of her, but eventually his own moral compass led him to betray her to X-Factor and the American CIA. She disowned him as a result, and given that the demon inside her killed her not long afterwards, it is unlikely they ever got to reconcile. It’s especially tragic given that Monsoon did not know his loving sister was possessed and not in her right mind, so to this day he likely has no idea why she changed as she did, nor any clue what happened to her. He has not been heard from since, but is listed as one of the mutants who lost their powers on M-Day. Aloba was born in Mumbai (then still Bombay) to extremely wealthy and religious parents. His father was a Hindu and a diplomat, his mother a Zoroastrian and a professor of philosophy. Both their parents were extremely charitable people who used their wealth to help others, and encouraged their children to do the same. They also encouraged them to embrace ALL world religions, so long as love was at the center. It is unknown what the exact age difference between him and Radha/Haven is, but a flashback shows he was an infant when she was in her teens. Haven is also implied to have lost her parents by her late teens, which means she likely raised Aloba, which might account for his deep devotion to her. While Monsoon respects his sister greatly and seems to agree with her peaceful views---the ones that don’t include mass murder and terrorist cults, which aren’t really HERS anyway--- he seems to have a harder time staying calm in the face of animosity and antagonism than she does. Haven describes him as having a temper but a good heart. However, it may be not so much that he has a “temper” as that he just isn’t a supernaturally serene person like Haven---for instance, when he got mad at X-Factor, it was because Havok kept being disrespectful to Haven, and because when X-Factor first arrived at Haven’s base to talk to her, Monsoon asked them to lay down their arms...and then Random, the mercenary that X-Factor had brought with them, immediately fired on him and the other guards. I don’t think you need a “temper” to be a little pissed at somebody after that! I liked Monsoon. His love for his sister, his pain over what she became, his conflict over what was the right thing to do, and his despair when she cast him out were all pretty gut-punching despite his overall small story presence. I’ve always wished that Haven survived or came back so that they could make up and be a family again.
12 notes · View notes
sirpaddydax · 6 years
Photo
Tumblr media
Kamyar Jahan https://www.instagram.com/p/Bop99yVl6Sm/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=grlyr9rj5aay
8 notes · View notes
benrleeusa · 6 years
Text
[Eugene Volokh] "Indictment: Man Behind Cyberattacks Was Working for Wichita Lawyer"
The Justice Department reports on this indictment:
A Wichita lawyer and a computer software engineer were charged [Tuesday] in a federal indictment alleging they were responsible for cyberattacks on web sites that posted information critical of the lawyer's work, U.S. Attorney Stephen McAllister said.
Wichita Attorney Bradley A. Pistotnik, 62, and David Dorsett, 36, Wichita, Kan., co-founder of a company called VIRAL Artificial Intelligence, are charged with five counts of computer fraud and two counts of conspiracy. In addition, Pistotnik is charged with three counts of making false statements to the FBI.
The indictment alleges Pistonik and Dorsett are responsible for cyberattacks on Leagle.com, Ripoffreport.com and JaburgWilk.com. The indictment alleges Dorsett filled the web site's in-boxes with threats.
One of the emails read: "Remove this page and we stop" and "if you don't remove it we will begin targeting your advertisers and explain that this will stop happening to them once they pull their ads from leagle.com or leagle.com kills this page."
The indictment [also] alleges that when an FBI agent questioned Pistotnik he made false statements ....
Pistotnik responded to a KWCH-TV media query by saying,
We have been aware of these allegations for more than two years. We conducted our own investigation and shared our findings with the U.S. Attorney. We have had no request for follow-up, and we consider the matter closed. We are surprised the matter has resurfaced. We denied the allegations then and now.
Wichita press accounts suggest that Pistotnik is well-known as a local lawyer. I've seen no indication of just which case on leagle.com the attack was meant to get taken down, but it might have been In re Pistotnik (Kan. 1993):
This is an original proceeding in discipline filed [in 1992] by the Office of the Disciplinary Administrator against Bradley A. Pistotnik, an attorney admitted to the practice of law in Kansas. Two formal disciplinary complaints ... were brought against Pistotnik based on a pattern of repeated criminal offenses and on his conduct in connection with a personal injury action....
IT IS ... ORDERED that Bradley A. Pistotnik be and he is hereby suspended from the practice of law in the State of Kansas for a period of one year ....
Relatedly, some months ago a federal jury convicted a different man for a different but similar attack; here's the press release from when he was indicted:
A Seattle man has been charged in a federal indictment, returned late yesterday, with one count of knowingly causing the transmission of a command to a protected computer, announced U.S. Attorney John Parker of the Northern District of Texas (NDTX).
Kamyar Jahanrakhshan, aka "Kamyar Jahan Rakhshan," "Andy or Andrew Rakhshan," "Andy or Andrew Kamyar," and "Kamiar or Kamier Rakhshan," 37, of Seattle, Washington, was arrested late last month in the Western District of Washington (WDWA) on a related federal criminal complaint, filed on July 29, 2016, in the U.S. District Court for the NDTX. He made his initial appearance before a U.S. Magistrate Judge in federal court in the WDWA on July 26, 2017, and was detained. The U.S. Magistrate Judge set Rakhshan's identity hearing in WDWA on August 14, 2017, after which, Rakhshan should be transported to Dallas to appear in a federal court in the NDTX.
The indictment alleges that between December 30, 2014 and January 25, 2015, Jahanrakhshan knowingly caused the transmission of a program, information, code, and command, and, as a result of such conduct, intentionally caused a denial of service attack on the website Leagle.com without authorization to a protected computer causing a loss of at least $5,000 during a one-year period.
0 notes
nancyedimick · 7 years
Text
Man tries to get online material taken down — via denial-of-service extortion and bomb threats
From the Justice Department:
Kamyar Jahanrakhshan, aka “Kamyar Jahan Rakhshan,” “Andy or Andrew Rakhshan,” “Andy or Andrew Kamyar,” and “Kamiar or Kamier Rakhshan,” 32, of Seattle, Washington, was arrested [Friday] on a federal criminal complaint charging him with extortion by threats to cause damage to the Dallas, Texas hosting company for Leagle.com, announced U.S. Attorney John Parker of the Northern District of Texas.
According to the affidavit filed with the complaint, on December 30, 2014 Leagle.com, an aggregator of case law from Federal and certain State courts, was contacted by an individual by the name of Andrew Rakhshan by e-mail requesting that a URL linking to a court decision involving Rakhshan be deleted. Claiming that he was the plaintiff in the case, Rakhshan stated that he did not want the opinion available on the internet as it was tarnishing his reputation and violating his privacy. Rakhshan offered to pay a fee to have the post removed.
Between December 30, 2014 and January 16, 2015, Leagle.com received multiple e-mails signed by Andrew Rakhshan offering to pay for the removal of a court opinion in which Rakhshan was a party to. On January 24, 2015 Rakhshan again sent an e-mail claiming that he met a group of hackers online whom were willing to launch a massive cyber-attack on Leagle.com. Rakhshan claimed that he had no other options to resolve the matter. He threatened to use these hackers to conduct a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack to force Leagle.com to comply with his demands. On January 25, 2015, a large amount of traffic targeted the IP address for Leagle.com. The actions the company took could not mitigate the attack traffic. The attack subsided once the company removed the link to the court opinion.
Similar DDoS attacks were carried out by Rakhshan on Fairfax Media5, a media company in Australia and New Zealand; The Metro News, a daily newspaper; Canadian Broadcasting Corporation; and Canada.com, a social media discussion site. At times Rakhshan escalated his threats from DDoS attacks to threats of bomb attacks.
A criminal complaint is a written statement of the essential facts of the offense charged and must be made under oath before a magistrate judge. A defendant is entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. The government has 30 days to present the matter to a grand jury for indictment. The maximum statutory penalty for the offenses as charged is 5 years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation investigated the case, with assistance from the FBI Dallas cyber squad, Seattle cyber task force, Toronto police department, and the Australian federal police….
Here’s an excerpt from the opinion that Rakhshan was trying to get removed, Rakhshan v. Whatcom County (Wash. Ct. App. 2009):
A thief has no right to possess stolen property. Here, because the evidence submitted in opposition to Whatcom County’s motion for summary judgment is “too incredible to be believed,” Andrew Rakhshan has failed in his burden to show there are any genuine issues of material fact. Whatcom County is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. We affirm the dismissal with prejudice and impose sanctions against Rakhshan.
In November 2003, the Whatcom County Sherriff seized five vehicles from a storage yard in Whatcom County based on the claim that Rakhshan had no right to possess the cars because he obtained them by using fraudulent credit cards. In June 2005, he commenced this conversion action against the County….
In 2005, following unsuccessful cross-motions for summary judgment by the parties, Whatcom County obtained authorization from the trial court for depositions in France pursuant to CR 28(b). The trial court sent a letter of request for international judicial assistance to the French court listing the witnesses to be examined and describing the evidence requested. The list included Rakhshan’s relatives, Jean-Pierre Fournier and Francois Dupont, whom he had identified as persons with knowledge of the transactions at issue in acquisition of the cars the County seized. The Higher Level Court of Paris convened an International Rogatory Commission and took testimony from the County’s witnesses. Neither Rakhshan’s relatives nor Fournier nor Dupont appeared before the Commission. Moreover, Rakhshan failed to submit any questions to the Commission for examination of the witnesses.
[Paragraph moved:-EV] The trial court noted that French authorities had reported that the witnesses and participants of the Rogatory Commission had received death threats and had increased security in response. The court also noted that a declaration from Skagit County Superior Court Judge Susan Cook indicated that she received communications from the Rogatory Commission regarding a fraudulent fax bearing her signature and purporting to cancel the Commission.
Rakhshan then sought the trial court’s permission to take depositions of his relatives in London and to present the deposition of Fournier, which Rakhshan alleged that he had taken while Fournier was recently in Canada. The trial court denied Rakhshan’s motion and granted the County’s motion to strike the Fournier deposition. [Whatcom County moved for summary judgment, and the case was dismissed, with the County getting] a judgment of $27,103.79 against Rakhshan for attorney fees and expenses….
In support of its summary judgment motion, the County presented evidence that Rakhshan arranged to purchase the cars from various dealerships over the internet and telephone. Rakhshan admitted that he represented a fake, novelty identification card bearing the name “Andrew Rahshan” to be an authentic British Columbia driver’s license in order to purchase the vehicles. He sent the dealers copies of several credit cards bearing the bank designation “BDNI” and an account holder name of “Andrew Rahshan.” The County presented the declaration of Joseph Majka of Visa U.S.A. Inc., stating that BDNI is an Indonesian bank that has not been a Visa member since 1998, such that any card bearing the BDNI designation and an expiration date beyond 1998 cannot be legitimate. Majka also stated that the routing number appearing on the cards used by Rakhshan is being used under license by Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, France (“HSBC”), and would not appear on a BDNI card….
In response, Rakhshan claimed that his relatives in France authorized him to purchase the cars with their credit cards. He claimed that his witnesses, including his relatives and French bank employee Jean-Pierre Fournier, would testify that the account numbers that he used to buy the cars were issued to his relatives by the French bank and that he was authorized to use the accounts. He contended that Dupont, another purported French Bank employee, could verify Fournier’s employment at the bank. None of this is believable, as the trial court observed….
In this case, Rakhshan persisted in his conversion action against Whatcom County despite the lack of any facts or law to support such a claim. Rakhshan’s appeal presents no debatable issues and is frivolous….
For more on the new criminal case, see the FBI agent’s affidavit; thanks to David Kravets (Ars Technica) for the pointer. For more on attempts to get online material taken down, including through fraudulent conduct (but not extortion or bomb threats), see some of the posts on this thread.
Originally Found On: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/08/03/man-tries-to-get-online-material-taken-down-via-denial-of-service-extortion-and-bomb-threats/
0 notes
wolfandpravato · 7 years
Text
Man tries to get online material taken down — via denial-of-service extortion and bomb threats
From the Justice Department:
Kamyar Jahanrakhshan, aka “Kamyar Jahan Rakhshan,” “Andy or Andrew Rakhshan,” “Andy or Andrew Kamyar,” and “Kamiar or Kamier Rakhshan,” 32, of Seattle, Washington, was arrested [Friday] on a federal criminal complaint charging him with extortion by threats to cause damage to the Dallas, Texas hosting company for Leagle.com, announced U.S. Attorney John Parker of the Northern District of Texas.
According to the affidavit filed with the complaint, on December 30, 2014 Leagle.com, an aggregator of case law from Federal and certain State courts, was contacted by an individual by the name of Andrew Rakhshan by e-mail requesting that a URL linking to a court decision involving Rakhshan be deleted. Claiming that he was the plaintiff in the case, Rakhshan stated that he did not want the opinion available on the internet as it was tarnishing his reputation and violating his privacy. Rakhshan offered to pay a fee to have the post removed.
Between December 30, 2014 and January 16, 2015, Leagle.com received multiple e-mails signed by Andrew Rakhshan offering to pay for the removal of a court opinion in which Rakhshan was a party to. On January 24, 2015 Rakhshan again sent an e-mail claiming that he met a group of hackers online whom were willing to launch a massive cyber-attack on Leagle.com. Rakhshan claimed that he had no other options to resolve the matter. He threatened to use these hackers to conduct a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack to force Leagle.com to comply with his demands. On January 25, 2015, a large amount of traffic targeted the IP address for Leagle.com. The actions the company took could not mitigate the attack traffic. The attack subsided once the company removed the link to the court opinion.
Similar DDoS attacks were carried out by Rakhshan on Fairfax Media5, a media company in Australia and New Zealand; The Metro News, a daily newspaper; Canadian Broadcasting Corporation; and Canada.com, a social media discussion site. At times Rakhshan escalated his threats from DDoS attacks to threats of bomb attacks.
A criminal complaint is a written statement of the essential facts of the offense charged and must be made under oath before a magistrate judge. A defendant is entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. The government has 30 days to present the matter to a grand jury for indictment. The maximum statutory penalty for the offenses as charged is 5 years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation investigated the case, with assistance from the FBI Dallas cyber squad, Seattle cyber task force, Toronto police department, and the Australian federal police….
Here’s an excerpt from the opinion that Rakhshan was trying to get removed, Rakhshan v. Whatcom County (Wash. Ct. App. 2009):
A thief has no right to possess stolen property. Here, because the evidence submitted in opposition to Whatcom County’s motion for summary judgment is “too incredible to be believed,” Andrew Rakhshan has failed in his burden to show there are any genuine issues of material fact. Whatcom County is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. We affirm the dismissal with prejudice and impose sanctions against Rakhshan.
In November 2003, the Whatcom County Sherriff seized five vehicles from a storage yard in Whatcom County based on the claim that Rakhshan had no right to possess the cars because he obtained them by using fraudulent credit cards. In June 2005, he commenced this conversion action against the County….
In 2005, following unsuccessful cross-motions for summary judgment by the parties, Whatcom County obtained authorization from the trial court for depositions in France pursuant to CR 28(b). The trial court sent a letter of request for international judicial assistance to the French court listing the witnesses to be examined and describing the evidence requested. The list included Rakhshan’s relatives, Jean-Pierre Fournier and Francois Dupont, whom he had identified as persons with knowledge of the transactions at issue in acquisition of the cars the County seized. The Higher Level Court of Paris convened an International Rogatory Commission and took testimony from the County’s witnesses. Neither Rakhshan’s relatives nor Fournier nor Dupont appeared before the Commission. Moreover, Rakhshan failed to submit any questions to the Commission for examination of the witnesses.
[Paragraph moved:-EV] The trial court noted that French authorities had reported that the witnesses and participants of the Rogatory Commission had received death threats and had increased security in response. The court also noted that a declaration from Skagit County Superior Court Judge Susan Cook indicated that she received communications from the Rogatory Commission regarding a fraudulent fax bearing her signature and purporting to cancel the Commission.
Rakhshan then sought the trial court’s permission to take depositions of his relatives in London and to present the deposition of Fournier, which Rakhshan alleged that he had taken while Fournier was recently in Canada. The trial court denied Rakhshan’s motion and granted the County’s motion to strike the Fournier deposition. [Whatcom County moved for summary judgment, and the case was dismissed, with the County getting] a judgment of $27,103.79 against Rakhshan for attorney fees and expenses….
In support of its summary judgment motion, the County presented evidence that Rakhshan arranged to purchase the cars from various dealerships over the internet and telephone. Rakhshan admitted that he represented a fake, novelty identification card bearing the name “Andrew Rahshan” to be an authentic British Columbia driver’s license in order to purchase the vehicles. He sent the dealers copies of several credit cards bearing the bank designation “BDNI” and an account holder name of “Andrew Rahshan.” The County presented the declaration of Joseph Majka of Visa U.S.A. Inc., stating that BDNI is an Indonesian bank that has not been a Visa member since 1998, such that any card bearing the BDNI designation and an expiration date beyond 1998 cannot be legitimate. Majka also stated that the routing number appearing on the cards used by Rakhshan is being used under license by Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, France (“HSBC”), and would not appear on a BDNI card….
In response, Rakhshan claimed that his relatives in France authorized him to purchase the cars with their credit cards. He claimed that his witnesses, including his relatives and French bank employee Jean-Pierre Fournier, would testify that the account numbers that he used to buy the cars were issued to his relatives by the French bank and that he was authorized to use the accounts. He contended that Dupont, another purported French Bank employee, could verify Fournier’s employment at the bank. None of this is believable, as the trial court observed….
In this case, Rakhshan persisted in his conversion action against Whatcom County despite the lack of any facts or law to support such a claim. Rakhshan’s appeal presents no debatable issues and is frivolous….
For more on the new criminal case, see the FBI agent’s affidavit; thanks to David Kravets (Ars Technica) for the pointer. For more on attempts to get online material taken down, including through fraudulent conduct (but not extortion or bomb threats), see some of the posts on this thread.
Originally Found On: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/08/03/man-tries-to-get-online-material-taken-down-via-denial-of-service-extortion-and-bomb-threats/
0 notes
godsoflust-x · 2 years
Text
Tumblr media
11 notes · View notes
Text
new ‘9-1-1’ 4x06 guest star (izzy chainz)
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
8 notes · View notes
lynchoid · 8 years
Photo
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
203 notes · View notes
sirpaddydax · 6 years
Photo
Tumblr media
Kamyar Jahan https://www.instagram.com/p/Bop-FgHlsOO/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=k8dk1ioe1huz
6 notes · View notes
jesuischeveux · 9 years
Photo
Tumblr media
83 notes · View notes
benrleeusa · 7 years
Text
[Eugene Volokh] Man tries to get online material taken down — via denial-of-service extortion and bomb threats
From the Justice Department:
Kamyar Jahanrakhshan, aka “Kamyar Jahan Rakhshan,” “Andy or Andrew Rakhshan,” “Andy or Andrew Kamyar,” and “Kamiar or Kamier Rakhshan,” 32, of Seattle, Washington, was arrested [Friday] on a federal criminal complaint charging him with extortion by threats to cause damage to the Dallas, Texas hosting company for Leagle.com, announced U.S. Attorney John Parker of the Northern District of Texas.
According to the affidavit filed with the complaint, on December 30, 2014 Leagle.com, an aggregator of case law from Federal and certain State courts, was contacted by an individual by the name of Andrew Rakhshan by e-mail requesting that a URL linking to a court decision involving Rakhshan be deleted. Claiming that he was the plaintiff in the case, Rakhshan stated that he did not want the opinion available on the internet as it was tarnishing his reputation and violating his privacy. Rakhshan offered to pay a fee to have the post removed.
Between December 30, 2014 and January 16, 2015, Leagle.com received multiple e-mails signed by Andrew Rakhshan offering to pay for the removal of a court opinion in which Rakhshan was a party to. On January 24, 2015 Rakhshan again sent an e-mail claiming that he met a group of hackers online whom were willing to launch a massive cyber-attack on Leagle.com. Rakhshan claimed that he had no other options to resolve the matter. He threatened to use these hackers to conduct a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack to force Leagle.com to comply with his demands. On January 25, 2015, a large amount of traffic targeted the IP address for Leagle.com. The actions the company took could not mitigate the attack traffic. The attack subsided once the company removed the link to the court opinion.
Similar DDoS attacks were carried out by Rakhshan on Fairfax Media5, a media company in Australia and New Zealand; The Metro News, a daily newspaper; Canadian Broadcasting Corporation; and Canada.com, a social media discussion site. At times Rakhshan escalated his threats from DDoS attacks to threats of bomb attacks.
A criminal complaint is a written statement of the essential facts of the offense charged and must be made under oath before a magistrate judge. A defendant is entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. The government has 30 days to present the matter to a grand jury for indictment. The maximum statutory penalty for the offenses as charged is 5 years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation investigated the case, with assistance from the FBI Dallas cyber squad, Seattle cyber task force, Toronto police department, and the Australian federal police….
Here’s an excerpt from the opinion that Rakhshan was trying to get removed, Rakhshan v. Whatcom County (Wash. Ct. App. 2009):
A thief has no right to possess stolen property. Here, because the evidence submitted in opposition to Whatcom County’s motion for summary judgment is “too incredible to be believed,” Andrew Rakhshan has failed in his burden to show there are any genuine issues of material fact. Whatcom County is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. We affirm the dismissal with prejudice and impose sanctions against Rakhshan.
In November 2003, the Whatcom County Sherriff seized five vehicles from a storage yard in Whatcom County based on the claim that Rakhshan had no right to possess the cars because he obtained them by using fraudulent credit cards. In June 2005, he commenced this conversion action against the County….
In 2005, following unsuccessful cross-motions for summary judgment by the parties, Whatcom County obtained authorization from the trial court for depositions in France pursuant to CR 28(b). The trial court sent a letter of request for international judicial assistance to the French court listing the witnesses to be examined and describing the evidence requested. The list included Rakhshan’s relatives, Jean-Pierre Fournier and Francois Dupont, whom he had identified as persons with knowledge of the transactions at issue in acquisition of the cars the County seized. The Higher Level Court of Paris convened an International Rogatory Commission and took testimony from the County’s witnesses. Neither Rakhshan’s relatives nor Fournier nor Dupont appeared before the Commission. Moreover, Rakhshan failed to submit any questions to the Commission for examination of the witnesses.
[Paragraph moved:-EV] The trial court noted that French authorities had reported that the witnesses and participants of the Rogatory Commission had received death threats and had increased security in response. The court also noted that a declaration from Skagit County Superior Court Judge Susan Cook indicated that she received communications from the Rogatory Commission regarding a fraudulent fax bearing her signature and purporting to cancel the Commission.
Rakhshan then sought the trial court’s permission to take depositions of his relatives in London and to present the deposition of Fournier, which Rakhshan alleged that he had taken while Fournier was recently in Canada. The trial court denied Rakhshan’s motion and granted the County’s motion to strike the Fournier deposition. [Whatcom County moved for summary judgment, and the case was dismissed, with the County getting] a judgment of $27,103.79 against Rakhshan for attorney fees and expenses….
In support of its summary judgment motion, the County presented evidence that Rakhshan arranged to purchase the cars from various dealerships over the internet and telephone. Rakhshan admitted that he represented a fake, novelty identification card bearing the name “Andrew Rahshan” to be an authentic British Columbia driver’s license in order to purchase the vehicles. He sent the dealers copies of several credit cards bearing the bank designation “BDNI” and an account holder name of “Andrew Rahshan.” The County presented the declaration of Joseph Majka of Visa U.S.A. Inc., stating that BDNI is an Indonesian bank that has not been a Visa member since 1998, such that any card bearing the BDNI designation and an expiration date beyond 1998 cannot be legitimate. Majka also stated that the routing number appearing on the cards used by Rakhshan is being used under license by Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, France (“HSBC”), and would not appear on a BDNI card….
In response, Rakhshan claimed that his relatives in France authorized him to purchase the cars with their credit cards. He claimed that his witnesses, including his relatives and French bank employee Jean-Pierre Fournier, would testify that the account numbers that he used to buy the cars were issued to his relatives by the French bank and that he was authorized to use the accounts. He contended that Dupont, another purported French Bank employee, could verify Fournier’s employment at the bank. None of this is believable, as the trial court observed….
In this case, Rakhshan persisted in his conversion action against Whatcom County despite the lack of any facts or law to support such a claim. Rakhshan’s appeal presents no debatable issues and is frivolous….
For more on the new criminal case, see the FBI agent’s affidavit; thanks to David Kravets (Ars Technica) for the pointer. For more on attempts to get online material taken down, including through fraudulent conduct (but not extortion or bomb threats), see some of the posts on this thread.
0 notes
sirpaddydax · 7 years
Photo
Tumblr media
Kamyar Jahan
31 notes · View notes