"Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them."
Check Out the Official Taken By Towle Theme Song! "You're Going Down!"
The False Accusations!
Scott Lee was falsely accused and sued only to take from him from his replica, his work and his money.
| |
YOU CAN DOWNLOAD MARK TOWLE'S HEINOUS AND FRAUDULANT LAWSUIT AGAINST SCOTT LEE HERE! |
 |
Scott Lee being fed up with Mark Towle's games, tricks and threats, only for Mark Towle to quit the project and send him a letter demanding $22,750 from him, quickly filed a Lawsuit against Mark Towle from the Circuit Court of Jefferson County West Virginia. Scott Lee was completely pissed off, and this set Scott back into the mindset remembering being picked on in junior high school when he finally had had enough and started taking on Bullies in school that had refused to stop tormenting him. Mark Towle was such a Bully and Scott had had his fill of him. Scott was ready for a fight! Scott was mad as hell not about to take Mark Towle's crap anymore. How angry would a guy with not even a day of Law School have to be to file a civil suit on a far wealthier opponent? Scott was beyond livid and still is completely and totally PISSED OFF and waiting if not hoping for another round against this Bully. Mark Towle seems to want to get back into the Courtroom with Scott and Scott is more than OK with that! BRING IT!
Mark Towle was served an Unlimited Lawsuit in California and should have been tried in West Virginia, but with lies and false swearing they managed to convince the Judge in West Virginia that Kory Geick was just a fan and didn't actually do any business with Mark Towle, claiming that Scott Lee actually made first contact with Mark Towle instead of the truth which is that Kory Geick did work for Mark Towle and pursued Scott on Mark Towle's behalf. In this site is the full proof that Kory Geick has worked for Mark Towle in business and that Scott spoke honestly to all Courts.
They even went further and accused Scott Lee of committing perjury while he honesty told the court that Kory was working for Mark Towle when Scott was contacted to take Scott's deal away from Mark Racop of Fiberglass Freaks. These guys are deplorable people. With their deceptions in place, Judge Sanders of the Circuit Court made an embarrassingly faulty decision. He deferred to Mark Towle's complaint in California and left one of his own residents vulnerable to a completely fabricated Lawsuit 2,700 miles from his Court.
As stated before, Mark Towle hired a local West Virginia Attorney, Glen Franklin Koontz. Towle and Geick began signing their names to lies in sworn Declarations within West Virginia's Circuit Court and Koontz had no problem with filing them. They followed with a frivolous civil action from California against Scott that led to the dispute being heard in California and not in West Virginia. This frivolous Lawsuit against Scott Lee was full of flagrant fabricated false allegations against Scott. What is ironic is that if you read their allegations and accusations they completely correlate with Scott Lee's claims against Mark Towle and Kory Geick. They simply twisted the true account of what had actually transpired!
"It's vital that the Public be fully warned that Mark Towle is not above totally fabricating a Lawsuit to keep Money and Bartered Services from his client and force a client to have to fight for his money back while under fraudulent attack. This needs to be expressed strongly to anyone even thinking about making any deals with Mark Towle. This happened, Towle did this and it's proven!"
Mark Towle and his attorney fabricated a full list of garbage accusations with nothing to support them, and at the same time attempted to coerce $22,700 within their complaint while using the Superior California Court as a means to force Scott Lee into folding and paying Mark Towle all that money after he had been forced to endure years of extorted work while receiving legal threats. Read number 12 (1) in the 2nd page below. Mark Towle is a deplorable person.
Their ploys failed because Scott didn't fade, he didn't falter, he regrouped, rallied his spirit and filed a 200 page Cross Complaint against Mark Towle in Riverside California Superior Court. Mark Towle's Breaches over a 5 year period were so numerous that it took Scott nearly 200 pages with Exhibits to actually present them. In fact, in open Court Mark Towle's attorney complained grievously about the size of Scott Lee's complaint. Scott pursued Mark Towle all the way into Riverside California where Scott Lee appeared as his own Attorney and won a large judgment against the dishonest car builder.
Someone HAD TO face this creep down and come out of the battle free to warn others. All others had settled or simply given up their money and walked away defeated. Already Mark Towle is trying to scare Scott Lee into taking this site down and censor the truth about himself. THAT is NOT going to Happen!
Scott Lee has already been clinically dead in a Hospital in Baltimore Maryland and brought back. He carries NO FEAR! Doing what is right to protect others is what matters and Towle should have learned that as a child but as of yet he evidently doesn't understand or even comprehend the concept of goodness and fairness. Mark Towle can forget fully and totally EVER intimidating a dead man. Scott's been to the other side and back.
"When it came time for Scott Lee's trial Mark Towle had no evidence and presented none at the trial, in fact, Mark Towle didn't even show up for Scott's trial, neither did his Attorney. All of the fraudulent charges were dismissed by the Honorable John Molloy, Judge of the Riverside County Superior Court. Mark Towle attempted twice more to refile other false charges against Scott but the Court wasn't having it."
It's also important to mention that within his complaint against Scott, Mark Towle filed a fraudulent Contract as well as an altered second contract and swore both of them to be true to the Court. Mark Towle should be jailed for this, but so far the Police have not acted. Scott Lee will further pursue charges against Mark Towle in the future for these acts against him.
Here are the fraudulent accusations as Mark Towle fabricated them and falsely charged Scott while employing his California Attorney, Wm. Greg Bennett.
In the document below, Scott Lee is the Defendant and Mark Towle is the Plaintiff.
What is most important is to get the public's attention and show that Mark Towle is not beyond filing a heinous frivolous Lawsuit in order to keep someone's money or replica and not complete anything he promised his client under Contract. Mark Towle had used Scott Lee's work on his Web Site for over 4 years, refused to pay him anything and then came back and filed a lawsuit on him so he could take Scott's years of work, his thousands of dollars and his Batmobile Replica. What kind of person would do this? Mark Towle is a horrible, reprehensible, and inexcusable excuse for a human being. That's all there is to it. How do people like Mark Towle and Kory Geick even sleep at night or live with themselves? How do they do it?
Again Scott Lee MUST STRESS to all of you that Mark Towle was not able to bring any actual evidence against Scott Lee to prove a single one of his accusations true, and neither Mark Towle nor his attorney appeared for Scott's trial. Scott however during Mark Towle's trial, arrived armed with his computer and a stack of foldered proving exhibits 12 inches high.
Below is Scott's Responses copied and pasted from his pleading to the above fictitious nonsensical claims from Mark Towle.
___________________________________________________________________________
Now comes John Scott Lee to Amend his Answer to Mark Towle’s false accusations upon him filed in this duplicated Civil Suit to one John Lee first filed upon Mark Towle in Civil action No. 11-C-337 in The Circuit Court of Jefferson County West Virginia back in September of 2011.
John Lee states that he is completely innocent of all accusations fraudulently conspired against him by Mark Towle with the collusion of his agent Kory Geick and that the Plaintiff will be able to prove each one of these claims against him false with the use of recorded conversations, messages, emails, and other correspondence regardless of any fraudulent collusion and lies preplanned to be perpetrated by the Plaintiff and his agent, Kory Geick.
Mark Towle has filed this case only to try and steal jurisdiction from West Virginia as well as to disadvantage John Lee financially and force him to settle his Civil Suit against him. This case brought upon John Lee is unfounded not based on any real damage incurred by Mark Towle from John Lee but is simply a legal tactic to attempt to deny him his legal right to try Mark Towle in the State of West Virginia for the theft of John Lee’s Money, Intellectual property as well as the 1966 Butts Batmobile replica he has more than earned and paid for under contract.
Attachments 3b. and 4: The Defendant John Lee Denies Mark Towle’s allegations as false and follows.:
1. Defendant failed to utilize the approved artwork on the 66bat and 89 pages
Answer: This is False, Mark Towle violated and Breached contract by refusing to continue with the pre-approved layout of which these pages were first laid out in. He subsequently put the Defendant through 17 months of revisions on a 4 month contract stalling the project and breached contract of approved initial layouts continually causing delays with the assistance of Kory Geick.
2. Defendant used the intellectual property belonging to others as art on the Website.
Answer: This is False, Mark Towle via his agent Kory Geick sent intellectual property to the Defendant and instructed the Defendant to Capture videos and other images and to use for them on the Web Site. The Agreement 2 Site never went live. In addition any source not created by the Defendant was altered substantially from any originals borrowed or used to create them legally his own originals per the standards of the Digital Millennium Act. The Plaintiff instructed the Defendant to use whatever he wanted to or that was sent to him on the grounds that it was a non commercial passive site for Agreement A, not displaying any immediate sales nor pricing. Which would place it in the same standing as any open non commercial status as any fan forum or Social Media. The Plaintiff later added pricing to his site thereby by his own actions changed his Web Site into an aggressive site with aggressive selling and even offering a ready for delivery as advertised with pricing a 66 Batmobile replica within it’s forum and on the landing page advertised a Batmobile Replica Kit for $5,500. The Agreement A Web work was completely approved of by the Plaintiff, The agreement B Web Site was never released to the Public. By Contract, your Defendant is not to be responsible for any content, therefore the Plaintiff has no grounds whatsoever for any relief.
3. Defendant frequently refused to collaborate with Plaintiff’s authorized consultant, Kory Geick, as instructed.
Answer: This is false, Kory Geick was ineffective and being used as a stall tactic to keep the contract from being completed. Kory Geick became abusive and as he was not a party to the Contract John Lee used his authority as a party to the contract to have him removed to attempt to complete the contract. Defendant and Plaintiff agreed that Kory Geick had to be removed. Defendant was forced to work with Kory Geick after reporting he was abusive and hampering the project. Kory Geick was always responded to in email so this statement is completely false.
4. Defendant frequently refused to collaborate telephonic-ally, requiring only email causing unreasonable delays.
Answer: This is False, Kory Geick and Mark Towle were ineffective in giving direction often directly conflicting with each other. Kory Geick wanted one thing, Mark Towle would cancel his direction and send the Defendant in another design direction. It became evident to the Defendant that they wished to avoid as much as possible in writing. Also Kory Geick and Mark Towle violated the Defendant with abuse and vulgar language that his young daughter would overhear on the Defendant’s answering machine. There is no provision in the contract that instruction was obligated to telephonic instruction. It was also evident that they were using the telephone to continue to hamper the project by making sure they had as little written on record as possible. Tremendous revisions as well as constant changes in direction causing a total rework or the vacating of much of the Defendants previously completed work forced him to demand all changes in writing to try and provide a written provable written record of what was being done to him. Telephonic communication was at times revoked and stipulated as in writing via email because of verbal attacks and persuasion and extortion placed upon him for tremendous additional work in violation of the contractual agreement. Email instruction was demanded to keep a record of conflicting instructions given, to obtain proof of bartered extra work for parts and to stop Kory Geick and Mark Towle from continually changing direction against each other and forcing the Defendant to complete wasted work, to avoid further delay, and to stop the threats made upon him and abuse via his phone. This emailing only was agreed to and then refused by Mark Towle time and again. Because of these factors, the Plaintiff’s accusation is false. The Plaintiff failed to maintain a workable threat free cordial environment for telephonic instruction to be continued or to be allowed. The Defendant has many legally obtained recordings to prove this to be true.
5. Defendant made unauthorized changes to the approved artwork, causing unreasonable delays;
Answer: This is False. The Plaintiff and Kory Geick, were responded to. All changes were made, however the amount of changes, the disagreement between Kory Geick and Mark Towle creatively created tremendous additional work for the Defendant. Mark Towle fully authorized Kory Geick to make changes, and then disputed him over and over again. Mark Towle is recorded stating he had approved nothing after 17 months in the project which they conjointly stalled, revised and breached contract through while the Defendant’s objections verbal and written all along they ignored while they forced the extension and incompletion of a contract that demanded all of the their content by a 4 month period. This in itself is an incredible statement considering Mark Towle and Kory Geick were all along demanding control of the design and that in itself was not given to them by contract. By the final Breach committed by the Plaintiff, Kory Geick and Mark Towle had still not provided much of their content. Any claim the Plaintiff has that the Defendant caused any delay is false. Either by intention or through collusion the Plaintiff and Kory Geick worked conjointly to deny the Defendant, content, payment for years of his work while maintaining his work live on the Web to Mark Towle’s benefit, made extreme conflicting revisions or manipulated him into delays that covered 17 months of hard work that they would either later change or toss out completely forcing the Defendant to start over. They were conjointly doing everything they could to continue benefiting from the Plaintiff and delaying him any payment as they continue to do in multiple Courts. To date the Defendant has received no Payment, the Corvette he was sent paperwork for nor his 1966 Butts Batmobile Replica.
6. Defendant spent unnecessary time and effort reworking previously rejected, inconsistent designs;
Answer: This is False. The Plaintiff and Kory Geick, worked to instruct pages, that later would conflict with Mark Towle’s input. Whether by design in collusion of the two to delay the project as long as possible in order to keep the Defendant from obtaining his 1966 Butts Batmobile Replica or by circumstance that they could not agree on direction, nothing was the Defendants fault. As stated in number 5, they often conflicted causing tremendous work for the Defendant not covered under contract. They refused to put instructions in writing to alleviate the problem, thereby proving to the Defendant that this tactic was intentional. Kory Geick would instruct an entire page designed stating that Mark Towle had presented to him this was what he wanted to be done and then Mark Towle would have the work rejected stating he never told Kory Geick he wanted that. One Page that took several weeks of back and forth with Kory Geick was later tossed out by Mark Towle by his claiming he had said long ago he didn’t like it, yet Kory Geick insisted he did and that he would talk him into the design while instructing the Defendant to revise it and move forward with it. The Defendant was in the middle of a design feud between Geick and Towle that he was being made to spend countless hours back and forth as Kory Geick and Mark Towle would disagree while delaying by years his payment. At times Kory Geick would give Mark Towle’s revisions of a page and later Mark Towle would claim he hadn’t even reviewed the page nor seen it. Thus they were required to put everything in email form which they eventually on and off refused to do.
7. Defendant violated the confidentiality agreement by disclosing confidential information to Plaintiff’s competitors;
Answer: This is False. The Plaintiff and the Defendant had no confidentiality agreement under the second contract. Regardless of the lack of a comprehensive confidentiality agreement the Defendant had no knowledge that possibly he could have shared with any competitors. This accusation is completely false. The Plaintiff was paranoid and constantly accused the Defendant of doing such, but there was never any substance to his fear nor any truth to his accusations or paranoia. Further, the Plaintiff breached all agreements never delivered any payment and abandoned the completion of the contract refusing to proceed even after extending the Defendant and forcing him to work over a year longer therefore the Plaintiff is not entitled to any confidentiality under either agreement or otherwise.
8. Defendant has verbally abused both Plaintiff and Mr. Geick on the telephone and rudely hung up on them, while making frequent and unwarranted threats of litigation;
Answer: This is False. The Plaintiff and Kory Geick both made first threats of litigation and both abused the Defendant. Defendant was taxed to his limits in patience, work load and his toleration for abusive messages and threats from both the Plaintiff and Kory Geick. More than once inappropriate messages were left on his answering machine that his then 5 year old daughter would hear as they came in highly upsetting her. Their stall tactics included phone calls where they refused to continue, failed for weeks to respond to revisions submitted but instead made threats and continued to stall. This accusation is inversely true about Mark Towle and Kory Geick and they have both been legally recorded within West Virginia carrying out threats and making vulgar attacks upon the Defendant. The Defendant was forced to hang up at times due to their abuse or simply that it became evident they wished to only stall the project and were wasting more of the Defendants time with stall tactics and providing no content, input nor feedback to the work completed, yet again continued to display and sell from their web site while denying the Defendant any payment for years of work.
9. Defendant fraudulently contacted Media Catch and attempted to have the Flash Site removed from their server;
Answer: This is False. The Plaintiff has never to this date paid the Defendant anything though his work was displayed on Media Catch servers to the entire world for many years. The Plaintiff has refused any payment for any work displayed on Media Catch servers. The work is the property of the Defendant as he has never been paid. Under attorney advice the Defendant contacted Media Catch to find out the proper process to get his work legally removed from Media Catch servers for non payment though he never acted to remove it other than through the Courts after he filed suit against the Defendant. The Defendant’s work remains unpaid for and as far as he knows still kidnapped and held captive on Media Catch servers by the Plaintiff as he never actively acted to remove it other than requesting Court intervention. It is probable the Defendant’s work is still being used by the Plaintiff by giving hidden URLs to potential clients. Even the 1966 Butts Batmobile Kit as well as his 1989 Corvette the Plaintiff in this case admits by the 2nd contract belongs to the Defendant is still denied him, even though the Plaintiff retains all of his intellectual unpaid for property by virtue of theft and Copyright Infringement without payment. The Defendants intellectual art as well as his property have been stolen by the Plaintiff in this case never released to him and yet Mark Towle benefited by the Defendant’s work for many years by displaying it on You Tube, the Web Site gothamgarage.net and other web forums and venues and might well be still utilizing it for his profit.
10. Defendant accessed the existing flash site and destroyed portions thereof. The Flash site now does not work correctly and requires optimization;
Answer: This is False. The Defendant has never received any payment for his work. He would have the right to remove all work displayed or destroy what he rightfully owns without ever receiving any compensation for it’s creation if he chose to but was advised by legal council not to. The Plaintiff removed the Flash site due to a law suit upon him by DC Comics. A change was made to modify the flash site not to be scalable to allow it better functionality with Windows 7 as per Kory Geick’s instruction but no portion of the Flash site was ever destroyed by the Defendant. The Defendant was locked out of the servers for the Plaintiff’s site in Breach of their agreement and the Plaintiff continued to use his work for years contrary to the Defendants objections with no payment to him whatsoever. The Plaintiff stole the Defendant’s work, refused him payment and refused to complete the 2nd contract denying him his property as well as his Intellectual art. Any alterations to the site post locking the Defendant out of the servers were by the Plaintiff’s action in response to two civil suits being brought against him. One by the Defendant and a huge Civil action by DC Comics against Mark Towle for Trademark Infringement. The Plaintiff had other unknown persons working within the site and the Defendant shares no responsibility for their actions. At all times the Plaintiff and his agent refused any and all contact between any other persons they gave access to the site and the unpaid work of the Defendant thereby making their claims questionable and unverifiable.
11. Defendant continued to refuse to accept Mr. Geick’s verbiage or finish the site stating that Plaintiff will have to take whatever content Defendant deem acceptable or “good enough”
Answer: This is False. The Defendant had been forced under duress and threat of civil suit to work 17 months on a contract that was specifically stated to be 4 months. The Plaintiff had stretched the contract beyond any reasonable means. The Plaintiff has demanded too much for too long. By advice of Attorney to do so, the Defendant was forced to notify the Plaintiff that he had far exceeded any reasonable expectations he should have from the Defendant. He was notified that he had to provide his content and finalize the site. He was a given a deadline to do so which he ignored. This he refused to do. The Plaintiff is the one that refused to continue and is recorded legally in WV doing so. The Defendant had expended unbelievable time and design resources toward attempting to complete the contract but he was being stalled and refused any reasonable cooperation to do so. After 17 months or more the Plaintiff had still not provided his total content and then simply refused to continue. He then threatened a law suit from his California Attorney while refusing payment of the nearly final 2nd Web Site. A Law suit was filed upon him shortly after from West Virginia by the Defendant. Defendant was told over the course of several years that he had to continue working or face a law suit by Mark Towle a much more wealthy person. The Defendant was extorted badly for more and more work over a 5 year period. He was denied his property after the first contract was to be completed and coerced into a second contract.
12. Defendant threatened to disclose the content of confidential communications through a website;
Answer: This is False. The Defendant retains the right to disclose what has been done to him publicly. The Defendant retains the right to disclose public documents, the circumstances of the fraud perpetrated on him, the stealing of his eight thousand dollars, 5 years of his Creative Labor, his intellectual property, his 1966 Butts Batmobile Kit, 1989 Corvette, additional earned parts, the methods used to scam him as well as any and all public court documents he can readily make PDFs of and provide to the Public to keep this from happening to anyone in the future by the perpetration and collusion of Mark Towle and Kory Geick. They are both already by evidence on the Web publicly considered to be dishonorable in the industry so this is not confidential.
This is his right to publish. This he will do. He has refused all attempts of the Plaintiff to sign any confidentiality agreements through multiple settlement offers from Mark Towle of his WV suit and he will publish the truth eventually of Mark Towle and Kory Geick and what they have done to him for the Public Good and the future protection of all. The Plaintiff breached his contracts stole everything possible he could from the Defendant and is not deserving of any silence nor loyalty from the Defendant. By forcing the Defendant to file suit against the Plaintiff within West Virginia Courts, the Plaintiff has already forced by his own acts the publication of his techniques to use, collect services and monies but deny any fair payment to the Defendant in the form of his 1966 Butts Batmobile replica. Anything disclosed is by virtue of default and breaches solely caused by the Plaintiff and not the Defendant. Any other claims of disclosure of confidential communication will be proven false by the Plaintiff’s own lack of credible evidence of any such acts being perpetrated by the Defendant. The Plaintiff can not prove what never happened.
13. Defendant purportedly used obsolete software for the creation of the site;
Answer: This is False. The Plaintiff used nearly the latest Adobe software available at the time to create the web sites. The Plaintiff made many attempts to learn the software used probably so he could pass the project onto another designer without payment to the Defendant. Nothing in either contract designates what software was to be used nor that the Defendant had to reveal what software was being employed for the creation of any of the contracted work to be done by the Defendant. This accusation is not only false but indeed is irrelevant as it does not pertain to any contractual obligations and therefore certainly can not be ascertained as any violation nor breach of any agreements. Kory Geick, the Plaintiff’s agent was told the versions and software used, yet they demanded this information in writing which was not required under contract and this demand came after the Defendant was told his work was going to be passed to another Designer without his permission. This accusation is completely False and the Defendant acted within his own rights and for his own protection.
14. Defendant purportedly included Flash within the HTML site in violation of Agreement 2;
Answer: This is False accusation. accusation. The Plaintiff is ignorant of Web Design and it’s limitations. Flash was requested to be used by Kory Geick and Mark Towle. Flash was incredibly instrumented in the contracted Agreement A web site. These same Flash based Videos previously employed on the first Web Site were all along instructed to be included in the Agreement B Web Site. They are directly referred to in the 2nd contract. They had been streamed on YouTube, a Flash based video platform benefiting the Plaintiff with thousands of views. Agreement 2 details these videos to be employed.
The Plaintiff will be proven to have requested not only these Flash Videos but also flash effects incorporated within the HTML Site. HTML is not a viable platform alone to present videos nor animation without the use of a program such as Flash. This accusation is inherently and blatantly ignorant. Not only did the Defendant demand the use of Flash but Agreement 2 specifies videos which were done and created and were all along processed as Flash. This accusation represents yet another fabricated lie construed by Mark Towle but this time in ignorance of what he was claiming. This false allegation is stretched beyond Mark Towle’s rational knowledge to know he was revealing his ambition to fabricate false charges against the Defendant. His accusation is false in that he demanded Flash effects and Flash pages as well as videos, yet true in that the Defendant did as he was requested and included Flash as demanded by Agreement 2 and as the Plaintiff himself demanded he do and include, which he did. The accusation however is False in that it was not a violation. The Defendant has proof in recordings of the Plaintiff not only requesting Flash but also complimenting the Defendant on their visual pleasing effects. The Plaintiff will be proven to be intentionally dishonest to this Court concocting this accusation as well as the others.
15. Defendant refuse to allow Plaintiff the opportunity to view the website in it’s final condition (without encryption) prior to delivery of the vehicle.
Answer: This is False accusation. The Plaintiff had refused the Defendant any payment, had locked him out of the servers from his intellectual property. The Plaintiff had breached all agreements and extended the work far beyond any reasonable length, workload extorted upon the Defendant and time-frame and implemented by the Plaintiff to extort more and more work from the Defendant without any further compensation to him. The Plaintiff would have had the ability to just download and steal the entire Agreement 2 Website while continuing to deny him payment and to continue to employ his previous work or transfer his work to another designer without permission or revealing he was doing so to the Defendant. Plaintiff had demonstrated consistently that he wished to employ the Defendant’s intellectual property for his benefit without allowing the Defendant any payment whatsoever. If the Defendant’s work had not been encrypted, the Plaintiff would have had the opportunity to pass the work forward to another Designer. The Plaintiff is recorded legally in the State of West Virginia agreeing to encryption to view the site. Therefore he agreed to the encryption.
The Plaintiff reviewed and responded with revisions to a previous encrypted version of the site without objection. The Plaintiff demanded the encryption be taken off only after this review. The Defendant believes he demanded the encryption removed after he learned he would not be able to download the site (steal it) or after realizing fully that it would not be public and therefore he would not be able to lay blame on the Defendant for publishing possibly trademarked materials he had been instructed to publish but that DC comics would find objectionable. Encryption was employed and deemed necessary to protect the Plaintiff and the Defendant from civil action from DC Comics for Trademark Infringement, which it successfully did. No charges have been brought against the Defendant by DC Comics and he is faultless as to any trademark violations ordered upon him to do by Mark Towle and Kory Geick in that Mark Towle approved the Agreement A Web Site as well as the fact that neither the public nor DC comics could nor were they ever allowed access to any review of the final beta site by the Defendant.
The Plaintiff has most likely not incurred any accusations of trademarked violations from DC Comics for the Agreement B Web Site thanks to this encryption and should well be thankful for the Defendant’s foresight, for he was convicted pending appeal for Trademark Violations for the first Agreement A web site which he approved completely, but not for the second encrypted site that neither the Public nor DC Comics were given any access to by the Defendant. It is also a likely possibility that the Plaintiff wished the encryption removed so that he could deny any involvement with the design to DC Comics and lay all legal liability squarely on the Defendant. The Defendant has been told that in the Suit in California Federal Court Mark Towle may have indeed already tried to lay blame on the Defendant for his Web Site and trademark infringements he was found guilty of unfairly upon your Defendant.
"If you plan on doing business with Mark Towle and Kory Geick, Remember, This Could Happen To You! Will you be Next?"
"SCOTT LEE DOES NOT RECOMMEND ANYONE EVER DOING BUSINESS WITH KORY GEICK NOR MARK TOWLE"
This site will be updated as time goes on and the evidence that defeated Mark Towle and his five attorneys will be made available to the public for the protection of the public against two deplorable guys that are still operating from the web site gothamgarage.com
out of the states of California and South Dakota.