LAW OFFICES
THOMPSON, SIZEMORE, GONZALEZ & HEARING
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
ONE TAMPA CITY CENTER
HARRISON C- THOMPSON. JR. GREGORY A- HEARING
(1925 - 1994) 201 N- FRANKLIN STREET SUITE 1600
MARQUIS W- H ElLIS
WILLIAM C. SIZEMORE POST OFFICE cOX 639 ERIN S JACKSON *
(1945 - 2004) TAMPA, FLoRIDA 3360
* KEVIN D- JOHNSON *
LUIS A- CASASSA (613) 273-0050
* GRETCHEN N- LEHMAN
JAMES M- CRAIG FAX NO- (GIG) 273-0072 LARA J. PEPPARD
JENNIFER M- FAGGION
CAREN N- SKVERSKY
THOMAS M- GONZALEZ
14 12 O0 DONNA V- SMITH
t BOARD CERtIFIED I N CIVIL TRIAL BY THE PLORIDA BAR ay 0
CHARLES J. THOMAS
* BOARD CERTIFIED IN LABOR & EnPLOYMENT LAW BY THE
FLORIDA BAR JENNIFER L- WATSON

Lee Drury DeCesare
15316 Gulf Boulevard
Unit 802
Madeira Beach Florida 33708

Dear Ms. DeCesare:

I thank you for your publication of my recent letters regarding the case of Satchel v. The School Board of Hillsborough County, Florida. I can tell from the tone of your posting of May 5, 2008, that it caused you much pain to have to publish something that is factually accurate. Yes, I had severe convulsions from my descent into candor. I have been abed since and do not expect recovery until you admit that Linda Kipley is the tackiest Professional Standards head in all of Florida.

Unfortunately, I will have to continue to insist that you do so whenever you venture from the truth, which seems to be a trip you take all too often. Listen, Sugarbritches, I have never in my long and vivid life "ventured from the truth." I have escaped the confines of the truth, galloped forth from the fetters of the truth, zipped in sprightly freedom from the dusty truth, and departed with vigorous eclat and great glee from the truth from time to time. But never have I ventured from it. I am not the venturing kind. Venturing is far too sedate for the kid here.

Having said that, I assure you that I have no intention of telling you what to think or write in your blog and you know that nothing in my letters suggests that I do. Doing so would be useless. And, yes, you have suggested that if I continue to speak my mind, you will sue me. You do in this letter. Remember that we deal in words here, and words are my specialty. Screwing-working-people precedents is your forte. Could you reveal whether you omit a comma after "blog" in the previous sentence just to annoy me or from ordinary ignorance? My only concern is for your less than nodding (Hyphenate "less-than-nodding.") acquaintance with facts. Facts are less than beguiling unless one bedizens them with the glitz of persiflage is my belief and practice. As for the “people who write messages to the blog,” anonymous comments really Don't use the superflous adverb "really." It makes you sound like a California or Beach Park Valley Girl. don’t concern me much and the fact that your husband had to ask who I was strongly Dump these superflous adverbs if you aspire to a cogent style. suggests that not even he reads your stuff, so the universe of potential commentators isn’t especially large, is it? Don't put three independent clauses in a sentence. Put a comma after "much." I can make my husband read what I write with kitchen blackmail, which I call the chicken-and-dumplings-deprivation strategy that all women know and employ ad lib. My writing upsets him because he is protective of me and thinks bozos like you mean it when you say you will bring me to the bar of justice. He, like you, is a Republican, and you know Republicans have frail nervous systems. That's why they don't want things to change ever. I have been giving my old man curtain lectures for almost 52 years on changing from the Grand Old Party of Bigots to that of us compassionate Democrats. So far I have failed. But I have a few years left for this project. Don't ever underestimate the elasticity and enterprise of a mother who has raised two Democrats and two Republicans.

You contend that your latest mention of the fees paid to my firm in the Erwin litigation constitutes the fourth time you have asked me for that information. Once again you deviate from reality. You have never asked me for that information. I begin to suspect email flimflam here. I didn't know you had turned off my email in a snit. So I continued to send you messages that didn't come back. I rest my case.

Moreover, I hope I have made clear my intention to not answer your requests, just as I have made clear that fees paid to my firm are public record when they are in the possession of a public entity subject to the public records law, not in mine. If that be not an anal-retentive, fusty old windbag of a sentence, I have never read one. No, you have not made the foregoing clear. God forbid that you ever make anything clear to a citizen of my meagre understanding. That would break precedent and transition you from rude to polite. If you want to obtain such records relating to the School Board of Hillsborough County, you should direct your request to the appropriate custodian of those records. I am unaware of your ever having made such a request. I am aware of it, and I am the one that counts, Mr. Hoity Toity Above It All. Do you say, "If you want information, ask Linda"?

As for your husband, if I am thirty years younger than he then he is 88 years old. No, he is a dewy 75. But if he weighs 235 pounds then he has a significant edge in that category, Vanity, vanity. I bet you weigh 275 if you weigh an ounce. I suspect your love handles clock in at 50 pounds apiece.so I appreciate your holding him off.

I do think you should know, however, that among the several clients I have served for some time is the City of Madeira Beach. Indeed, I performed work for them during the time I assume your husband had a role in the hiring of lawyers. He served that job a miserable twelve years before he quit in protest of incoming commissioners' firing our lawyer, who was the best the city ever had, my Tom said. While you characterize those I serve in less than complimentary terms, I assure you that I never got any indication that your spouse was a “fat-cat industrialist, corrupt school administrator [or a lazy-as-hog school-board member.”Did you fail to close the brackets, or did my shoddy scanner cut it off? I am going to assume my shoddy scanner is guiltless. Mayor Tom has snookered you, counselor. He's a born politician in the Dick Greco model and can flimflam his way out of anything. My consort, retired now from the corruption of politics, is indeed a "fat-cat industrialist" etc. wannabe. He just didn't have the get-up-and-go to achieve that Republican desideratum. It interfered with his TV sports and murder-mystery obsessions.

Lee Drury DeCesare
May 13, 2008
Page 2

Your obvious distaste for having to read my most recent letters brings to mind a communication you posted from a recipient of your mass-mailed blog who clearly considered it a much less than welcome gift. For asking that you take her/him off of your send list she/he received one of your trademark ad hominem attacks. I don't recall that request to take anybody off my list. Those who get my list are enchanted to get it is my impression. But if I wrote him/her an "ad hominem" attack, I want a copy of it. I am preserving all my ad hominem attacks in a family album for my grandchildren's delectation. Why can't this person use a block-sender on me? Or does he or she just like to call attention to him- herself?

Perhaps you will keep in mind your own response to my letters the next time someone asks you not to bother them. As for your comments on my shortcomings as a trial lawyer, I will note that: Dump that colon. You need an independent clause before a colon. (1) my win- loss record severely undercuts the validity of your opinion; (2) I didn’t try the Erwin case; and (3) your currently held opinion that I am “not pretty” enough to try cases is somewhat inconsistent with your earlier estimation that I am “one of the most beauteous cavaliers of the Legal Priesthood.” Consistency is the hobgoblin of creativity. You want me to be dull and predictable comme vous; but I won't be. I won't. I won't. You wrote that on December 1,2007. While my mother’s upbringing compels me to politely assume that you finally got your eyes checked, a small corner of my brain holds the strong suspicion that you are just a mean-spirited creature who when stuck for a substantive thought (as so often seems the case) will resort to vitriol with no concern for accuracy, one way or the other. Tell the truth: wouldn't you rather be around the vitriol producer than the goody-twoshoes twits of sanctimony who bore you to tears?

Have I ever bored you? No. And that's why we are today still conducting a Fed-X epistolary exchange to be published as Pamela II. I plan to send these exchanges off the to the Florida Bar journal, which, God knows, needs some jollying up. You certainly Dump this tendency to use superflous adverbs. It vitiates your style, which cannot stand too much more vitiating. evidenced that tendency when you responded to my statement to the Bar not by dealing with anything of substance but with a retreat to matters of grammar (and almost all of your comments in that regard were wrong as well, Ms. DeCesare, a fact anyone may verify by resort to any of the authorities to which you sometimes cite by title but obviously don’t actually read). Your grammar is shaky, Tom; you are not going to meet a better authority than I on this subject unless it is George Curme, now dead, but still top of the list of grammar gods. Meet me in the parking lot on any grammar question you want to dispute. I will wipe up the floor with you.

I am not aware of the existence of the “US Bar.” I assume you meant the American Bar Association, What a flatulent version of US Bar, which connotes not just law, but Wild-West law, where a hanging never came about except if the judge were three sheets to the wind. You have an appetite for the dry and dull. which is a voluntary organization having no authority over attorney licensure or complaints made against lawyers. What about the pompous dork Scalia and the other two Republican puke judges Bush just inflicted on us? I heard that the one whose wife wept during the hearings preens himself on his grammar bona fides. Should I write to those turkeys to cite your deficiencies? Then there's always Clarence Long Dong Silver to rat you out to. He can't even spell all that pornographic lingo he tortured What's Her Name with. In any event, I am not a member of the ABA, so don’t expect much from any contact that you may make with it. Now this I didn't expect. A Republican not a member of the ABA is a shocker when everybody knows Republicans are sticklers for belonging to all the ordinary, dull as a dish-clout associations because they lack the imagination to think of alternatives.

As you can tell, I did finally get around to reading your blog, Liar! Liar! Pants on fire. You dote on my blog. You live to read it. as I thought I should before responding to your unfounded Very well founded and carefully argued--but not dull. I had a wonderful time and made you spend many unbillable hours composing your labored, mendacious lucubration of a response. complaint to The Florida Bar. It was an instructive exercise. It was for you: you are not accustomed to defending yourself. Your mode is the autocratic attack on people cowed by your lawyer status and inferred power. I say to hell with lawyer status and pumped-up power. You are printing a lot of falsehoods, Ms. DeCesare. I hope to improve and double the number every time the moon is in the full. I will bay at it and pray to Hecate to help me bump up my lie output. You do not have to scour court files before uttering your thoughts, but when you make statements of alleged facts, you do have to a basis for them. Don't whine about scouring court files. You picked your worker-screwing field; nobody made you become a bloated-pay labor lawyer. You could be teaching Virgil in some flossy boys' prep school for a pittance. Then you would be pure and not bored out of your mind so that jousting with a put-upon citizen such as I represents to you the only diversion you can discover. I am saving your sanity, in fact. Any day you may doff your lawyer suit and run screaming down the court-house halls from reading too many precedents. The cry will ring out, "Send for De Cesare! She's the only person who can get his mind off his citation-of-precedents fetish.You very Dump "very." Don't use it ever again. often do not. The SLAPP statute which you seem to consider a safe harbor for slander protects you only from suits by an agency, not suits by individuals. Our exchanges are school-board related. That's our agency. You are its representative But if you are dying to sue me as an individual. I will try to attack you outside that agency one day when the spirit of adventure is upon me. Then let's see Torquemada's performance. You will make a fool of yourself, and I will call in as ally Mother Gonzalez as a character witness. The number of persons who have such a cause of action based on your commentary is legion. You really should consult with an attorney about your editorial policies. I consulted the best First Amendment lawyer in town--a fellow PBK member--gratis, and the information I have is that nobody bothers to sue bloggers. Bloggers don't have any money. I don't. I have sent all my egg money for the past year to Obama.



Lee Drury DeCesare
May 13, 2008
Page 3

On the date last mentioned you also wrote this:

Tom Gonzalez told the board to eat the losses on the two-section collapse since the contractor was not big enough to carry the catastrophic insurance burden that would indemnify the board.

That is what I understood you to advise after Pole Girl Falliera (your pin-up damsel in distress, for whom you currently spread your coat over puddles) had her faux hissy of alarm and indignation. I recall your mentioning an uncle contractor and let seep out that you entertained some sympathy for the breed.

You and I read words differently. That's what solipsism dooms us to--you more than me, of course. I am often able to get outside of my own head.

This statement, too, is false. You know it to be false, Don't use a comma before a trailing restrictive adverbial clause. I think I have told you that before. because you were in attendance when the settlement was recommended to the Board and had access to both the Board item which described the reasons for the recommendation and the public discussion of the agenda item in which those reasons were discussed. I asked about a bazillion times if you recommended in writing to the board that it get the hazard insurance to indemnify the loss. I never could prize an answer out of anybody. Linda, who is usually good at providing information that Hegarty is too dumb to find, ignored me.

I repeat: you may think what you wish. You are not, however, entitled in any way to write things that aren’t true. I hope one day that you learn that simple distinction. The most wonderful things in the world's history are things that are not true in the parochial sense, and yours, alas, is parochial. They are true in the transcendent sense. Think Aeschyles, Euripides, Sophocles. Think even Bill Maher.

My friend who's a commissioner in Indian Rocks says you are the firm chasing down the most recent city manager, who absconded with funds. He's a liar for sure. I tangled with him about his exchanges with the former mayor--another dork--about a woman alleged to have been sexually harassed in the city. I said I would not put up with elected officials' sexually harassing women. The theft-prone city manager claimed not to be alluding to the mayor's being the guilty party in an exchange of emails with him on the subject. Combating lies is about all I have time to do, come they so fast and furious at my poor head.

I told my friend to watch out for your hijinks, having described you as the beauteous Thomas Gonzalez, that you were a dangerous critter just dying to do mischief but that your chances of doing so were so frequent in your board job that you didn't have much time for mischief freelancing on the beaches.

Very truly yours,
Thomas M. Gonzalez
TMG/hs