I think that Ann's post was a great thing! It goes to support Mr. Ropers various contentions that, if as a pro-se defendant, you are so caught up on getting the PSA into evidence, YOU WILL LOSE.
It further goes on to support the technique of embracing the forged or fabricated evidence, and let the plaintiff's and their "white shoe" attorneys hang themselves with this evidence.
Angelo, I went back and looked again. My problem was not with the decision In Re Tarantolo case (with is more than eighteen months old), but rather in the singular mindless post by Mr. Weidner.
Quite frankly when I followed Ann's link and read Mr. Weidner's post, it seemed not to say anything. Including a single word "Tarantola" with a link on a line immediately above a row of social networking links, with no further explanation of discussion of the case is both worse than useless, but also the height of poor user friendliness.
When I read the post, it seemed not to say anything. Now, in review, it links to an 18 month old case. I think that the case is a good read. I also think that if Mr. Weidner wants to call attention to a particular case in a post that he probably ought to do that which Mr. Roper always did and which any other thoughtful attorney would do and furnish the case citation and perhaps shared a word or two about why this case is important:
In Re Anthony Tarantola, Case No. 4:09-bk-09703-EWH (U.S. Bankruptcy AZ, July 29, 2010)
When Ann noted the case, she might have done the same thing. I have now added the essential additional ingredient. This thread is now already more informative that Mr. Weidner's post.
Now that I can read the decision, I think that it is a very nice case. I also think that it is pretty stale news. This just in . . . Tea Party backed Republicans deal a startling setback to Democrats and seize control of the U.S. House! (Nov. 2010). Taratola was decided and published four months before that breaking news.
Thanks to you and others for clarifying that there was something meaningful at the other end of the cryptic Weidner post.
I agree with your assessment that it is supportive of what Mr. Roper has been teaching at this Forum.