| |
 |
State of Maine v. Michael A. Doyle
Lawyers: Reply to Berne's Response March 22, 2002 Ms. Karen Kingsley, Esq. RE: GCF #02-35/Richard Berne Dear Ms. Kingsley: I have underlined the passages that I take issue with and have numbered them for reference. Item 1. FALSE, the 1998 Fee arbitration was filed after VanDyke reviewed the file and stated that the fee was excessive for the work performed. In several telephone calls to Berne from VanDyke, Berne stated that he was not going to refund any of the fees. The Arbitration panel agreed with Berne that the fees were NOT EXCESSIVE for the work done. My complaint now is for FRAUD, MISREPRESENTATION, DISHONESTY, and LYING. This is hardly similar to the 1998 complaint and as such should be processed currently with a hearing. Item 2. FALSE, Berne took the files from me personally and I never saw them again until May 23, 2001. Item 3. FALSE, the entire interview was tape recorded by the State and there is no warning to me anyplace in the transcript. It would be logical that something as important as a "Miranda Warning" would actually be in the transcript. The fact that any warning is absent from the transcript would indicate that Berne is lying. Item 4. FALSE, during the 1998 Fee hearing Berne in his opening comments to the Panel admitted that it was his idea to take me to Augusta to be interviewed. He went on to explain that it was his method of conducting his practice. Berne fails to deny that he withheld documents from the State that would cast severe doubt on whether I was warned or not. Berne fails to deny that he withheld knowledge of documents that supported my position from me. Berne fails to deny that his actions were against my interests and indeed in support of DeTroy's interests. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Michael A. Doyle
| |||||||
