The picture is of David Blatner, the author of The Joy of Pi. He is standing beside the pi model that's in the inner courtyard of a Boeing fabrication division, in Auburn. Washington.
By way of a context, these facts are briefly put forth, but they are important to know. I went through a long court trial that caused me to discover and understand a fact about the history of law: in my mind I had years of experiences observing the operation of a mechanism of mind that creates self observation, possibly and I experienced the literal sense in law as a separate kind of mindset. If I'd not had the prolonged painful situation and begun to read law case histories I would not have understood how the psychological mechanisms that create 'projection' and the literal sense are (or were then) the basic form of legalese. Have you ever been in court and been told to answer either 'yes' or 'no', without an additional information, knowing the truth cannot be even talked about without context.
The way David Blatner this model came into contact was through a string of circumstances that began in 1993 when I found 5 acres with a lovely house on 5 acres, right on the Cedar River. It was a dream come true because the price was right, it was suitable for me, and it was on an especially lovely stretch of the Cedar River. I had property I could sell to acquire it so I made an offer. It was accepted so I listed my property and got a suitable buyer (I thought) who could easily complete the sale immediately. She set the closing date to be 30 days and I needed a quick closing so I was overjoyed to accept her offer.
Many problems arose from several areas but basically the real estate transaction from hell followed because my buyer didn't get financing in time for me to get my dream property and it was sold to someone else. (Every person involved in this transaction was in divorce mode, or was breaking up and was heartbroken as I found out later), except for the woman that offered to buy my property. When she did get financing, the contract between us had expired. The property I wanted to buy had a backup offer so it was sold, but she insisted termination dates didn't end our contract. She (and a hidden partner) wanted to buy my property. It's a block from Alki Beach in West Seattle, the address is 3014 61st Ave. S. W, by the way, its prime real estate. I had no reason to sell then and told her the contract had expired. She got an attorney who told me bluntly and arrogantly that the terms in a contract didn't matter, that if I didn't complete the sale a judge was going to decide everything. He told me I ought to avoid the costs, stress and turmoil a civil suit would create and just sell my property and get on with my life.
I was outraged when he told me the terms in a contract don't matter. I believed he could not ignore a legal agreement that way, so I got a lawyer after he filed a suit and I read the allegations in it. I was astonished when I read the 'allegations' in it, because all the details in the transaction were exactly reversed!!! His client had done what the suit said I'd done. There were signed documents that easily disproved everything in the suit so in my naiveté, I took them to that attorney to show him that he had reversed every detail. He waved my attempts away, saying in court the judge would decide what happened, "the papers don't matter"'. It was an extremely complex situation that would be difficult to describe in less than a book because every person involved was in emotional crisis except the buyer of my property. .
So I became involved in a civil suit that went as far as the State Supreme Court, during which time I began to read law cases, the precedent system and then books about the legal process and it's history. I hired one attorney, released him after a few months, then represented myself for a time, then got another attorney who seemed to do the necessary research so I had some degree of trust in him. As it turned out, none of the appropriate details, like documents that were on the record were brought out in court, the allegations in the suit were never mentioned in the trial. In fact the other attorney argued a completely different scenario , which I found out later often happens. One lawyer told me later that it often happens that a case can be filed just to get in front of a judge, the allegations don't have to be proved or as in this case, even mentioned.
The attorneys summarized their case, and the judge ruled against me. I asked my attorney why he had not focused on getting the actual documents brought out in court and at that point he told me the judge does not like to hear one attorney call another one a liar. "Both sides just tell a story and which ever story the judge likes best, he decides for." were his actual words to me as we walked out of the court room. So I filed an appeal to the state Supreme court and retained Gary Marshall who told me he had experience at that level.
The attorney that represented me at the Appeals court level became the instrument of 'fate', if that's what 'meaning-full coincidence' really is. Now what happened:
I was paying my bills one day and I'd written a check to pay Gary Marshall, the attorney that was representing me at the time. I had a package of pictures that I'd recently taken laying nearby and for some reason my hand reached for one of them. It was a picture of the pi model where I work. Without thinking, I slipped it into the envelope along with the bill. It didn't occur to me to wonder why I would send a picture of the pi model to my attorney, nor did I mention it at all later. The attorney didn't say anything about it either, for nearly a year . Then one day we were talking on the phone and he asked if I remembered a picture of a pi symbol that I'd sent to him. He told me he'd sent it off right away to a friend of his who was writing a book about pi. The book was ready for publication now and the author wanted to have his picture taken near the model in the picture. I told him where it was.
He told me his friend's name was David Blatner, so that's how I became aware a book about pi was being written. It was published at about the same time the movie Pi came out.
But the point is that no consciousness of mine made the decision to send that picture but my body acted on some alert and attentive component in my mind that made the decision. I watched without any curiosity! A distinct part of me other than my conscious will seemed to know the picture was so nearby and that a future event required me to do what I'd done.
What kind of foresight is inferred?
That kind of impulsivity has not been typical for me but it's not the first time it happened. There had been other situations when no reason I could see, my hand seemed to be working from some instructions that my own conscious intents, purpose and will were not creating.
Later another attorney told me it quite often happens that an attorney files a 'cause of action' just to get in front of a judge then a completely different issue or situation can be 'tried'. Because most people will do anything to avoid the expense, it usually enough to threaten a law suit. If that doesn't work, there's always the chance that a different judge will be sympathetic. The attorney also told me that nobody had to prove any of the allegations that had gotten the case to into court. That is what happened in this case, much to my utter disbelief.
I began to read legal texts and then I began to do research into the citation system. I had not known that there always had to be a precedent from the past, from a case that was supposed to be similar in some way to cite, in filing a suit. It involved taking a detail out of its original context as I found out, much the same way some religious people 'search the scriptures of the past' to prove something. The patterns of the past in the legal process are decisions made by other judges that in some way seem to be relevant to the present case. All the citations in this case were from complicated corporate real estate transactions that were not in any detail similar to a simple house sale.
After the trial, a thought flashed into my mind that 'searching the scriptures of the past' as a lawyer has to do, is symbolically connected to how many religions function.
Thus I became aware that the 'legal system' is based on the one pattern that governs almost every facet of life on Earth today: "searching the 'scriptures' of the past'", taking some detail out of it's original context.
It was an anguish to learn this because I had to learn this after the judge gave his decision. During the trial, I had noticed the two attorneys, mine and the other side's attorney seemed to ignore every detail written in the actual suit, and the judge seemed not to notice. He made no effort to conduct a trial about the 'allegations' made in the suit, there was not even a mention of the 'facts' in the papers I'd received.
It would have been hilarious if it had not involved a 'dream house' that I'd wanted to buy with the down payment his client was supposed to provide to me
The way the attorney reversed every detail, writing that I had done what in fact was what his client had done, and there were documents to prove it, gave me a perfect experience of how 'projection' as it is psychiatrically defined works. A person sees what he/she is doing but it seems like someone else is being observed. Its self observation turned around but it's a 'bit of information' that is somehow twisted around and exteriorized, outside of the body. I thought a heretical idea at that point because the talking snake in the garden of Eden could represent that kind of event. What seemed to be outside the body was really in the mind.
This is important: In every document cited in the trial, and they are all on record, this attorney described what his client had done, but attributed that in every detail to me! Nobody paid any attention. Well, it's a long very sad story but I won't go further into the details..
The important thing is that it's on record: There was a distinct reversal of every fact in the allegations and there was paperwork to prove this. But as my attorney told me after the trial, "The judge doesn't like to hear one attorney call another one a liar. Each side has to tell a story and whichever one the judge likes best will get his decision."
The judge dozed during some of the lawyers' proceedings.