The Strategic Maneuvers of Queen Tut Around the Robert David Steele Defamation Lawsuit

“…because you never take a stand against deception, what you have to do is move around deception.  You have to beat them at their own game”.  Queen Tut
[Queen Tut Interview II-Hoax Wars Live, published February 23, 2018 on You Tube, 34.14 mark]

Hoax Wars: Is the legal war between Robert David Steele and Queen Tut for real, or is it just a hoax mocking the American judicial system’s method of arriving at truth through facts and evidence?

On September 1, 2017 Robert David Steele and Earth Intelligence Network filed a civil lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division, against Jason Goodman, Patricia A. Negron and Queen Tut, A Woman Believed to be Known as Carla A. Howell.  The Plaintiff is seeking compensatory, statutory (three-fold the damages sustained), and punitive damages in an amount not less than $15,350,000.  In addition, the plaintiff desires “prejudgment interest on the principal sum awarded by the Jury from June 15, 2017 to the date of Judgment at the rate of six percent per year, attorney’s fees, and costs arising out of Defendants’ defamation per se, insulting words, business conspiracy, common-law conspiracy, and tortious interference with contract and business expectancies”.

Jason Goodman is representing himself (Pro Se), Patricia Negron is represented by professional legal counsel…and then there is the third defendant who is taking another strategy altogether.

Contrary to popular opinion, Queen Tut is not so ancient, after all. Her birth certificate filed with the federal court shows she is a young 80 years old, although suffering a bit of dementia, diagnosed after she forgot there is a $15 million dollar lawsuit against her.

The third defendant, Queen Tut, is known on the internet primarily through her anonymous interviews, and by her signature Trello Boards which feature the main points of her topics.

In the February 23d Hoax Wars interview, Queen Tut at the 32.11 mark says, “I’m getting to my reveal here, okay?  Because  I was fully aware of how RDS operates, because I worked in anti-corruption for many years and I’m aware of the kind of strategies that the bad guys use, okay, to manipulate and silence people.  I was involved in that very heavily for a long period of time and so when this court case was filed, I knew I was not gonna respond to it because first of all they had to serve me okay, which I have never been served um, and I knew that uh, they were just gonna try and flush Queen Tut out because they already had their hands on Jason, they already had their hands on Trish, but the whole thing is they just want to flush everybody out and you know, create chaos.”

Going back to when this defamation lawsuit was first filed, we find that on page 8 of the complaint that the statement was made that “Defendant, ‘Queen Tut’, is a person believed to be Carla A. Howell.  Howell is a citizen of New Jersey.  She is a political activist.  There is a biography of her on the internet…At all times relevant to this action, Queen Tut acted in concert with and as an agent, alter ego or instrumentality of Goodman and Negron”.

Later, without apology to Howell for falsely naming her as a defendant, the Plaintiffs filed court documents against another person who they thought might be Queen Tut, a Susan A. Lutzke who they claimed had been legally served with a court summons. Months later, when no response to this summons was made, the Plaintiffs asked the court to declare a default judgment against Lutzke.

The submission to the court of Queen Tut’s birth certificate

On February 22, 2018 a two page document comprised of a letter and a birth certificate was filed with the court stating that Queen Tut was given the name at birth of Helen Suzanne Ingraham.  The birth certificate displays a date of birth of December 4, 1937, making this new person behind the Queen Tut voice, to be 80 years old.  The accompanying letter from the daughter, Mercia Francis, claims that her mother has been diagnosed with dementia and is not providing an address or contact because of fears that Robert David Steele might send someone to harm her.

The next day, on February 23, 2018,  the attorney for the plaintiff filed an 8 page letter to the Judge indicating that they had no knowledge of Mercia Francis, the writer of the letter, and were unable to find any online information about this person.  Attorney  Steven S. Biss stated, “Defendant, Queen Tut a/k/a/ Susan A. Lutzke, does not suffer from dementia.” The rest of this letter was devoted to displaying Twitter messages from Queen Tut’s account in order to support their assertion that Susan Lutzke had “ramped up her attacks on Robert David Steele”.

Why are there no statements to the court from Carla Howell or Susan Lutzke?

What is so bizarre about this issue of who is behind the Queen Tut anonymous handle, is that neither Carla Howell nor Susan A. Lutzke has written the court to deny that they are this Queen Tut who is being sued for defamation against Robert David Steele and his nonprofit corporation, Earth Intelligence Network. The natural response of most persons to discovering that they were wrongly named as a defendant in a lawsuit would be to quickly and vehemently explain to the court that they had nothing to do with the plaintiff and demand that such persons cease and desist from continuing to make false accusations.

This new assertion to the court that Queen Tut is an 80 year old woman with dementia who is unwilling to provide an address or means of contact does little to clear up the mystery of her identity.  One has to consider that the childhood surname has since been changed to reflect at least one marriage, because the attorney for the plaintiffs were unable to discover an internet footprint of the names provided.

On February 23, 2018 a YouTube channel called Hoax Wars granted a second interview with Queen Tut.  The first interview involved her discussion of the amount of money that Patricia Negron had to pay for her legal representation, as well as remarks  about Jason Goodman and his legal strategy. In both interviews, Queen Tut is as lively as ever, with no signs of dementia or paranoia.

Before asking the Judge to declare a default judgment against Queen Tut, was she properly served with a summons as required by Federal court procedures?

In this most recent interview is the document shown below,  which Queen Tut displays in her usual Trello Board format. She has titled this board, (Double?) Agent Robert David Steele:  Active Measures Against the Internet Truth Movement…One of the pieces of evidence which Queen Tut presents to back up her arguments,  is a letter stating that Susan Lutzke had not lived in the condo apartments where Robert David Steele had claimed to have served her a court summons, since 2015.

When one reviews the Affidavit of Service which was provided by Roland Process Svc. and Investigations, LLC, it was noted that on October 11, 2017 that service was attempted, and “I spoke with a male subject stated his name was Steve. He said he has lived there for 2 years and has gotten several pieces of mail for Susan.”  On the fourth attempt, the documents were left at the door.

Should not the process server checked with the condo management regarding the tenancy of Susan Lutzke?

Given the statement by Steve Bytnar who claims that Susan A. Lutzke had not resided at the address in question since March of 2015, it would appear to the impartial observer that legal service had not been completed on Ms. Lutzke.  If that is the case, the document 30 filed in this lawsuit, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Entry of Default Against Defendant, “Queen Tut” a/k/a/ Susan A. Lutzke seems premature because it bases its conclusion on what appears to be misinformation that proper service had been completed. This is a matter for the Judge to review and make a determination on.

Is Robert David Steele a double agent of the Russians, and employing their Active Measures strategy?

Queen Tut’s Trello Board uses the term Active Measures which refers to the set of techniques which Soviet security and intelligence departments use to influence the politics of other nations. These methods are the same as that of the CIA, Mafia style groups and others, so it is significant that Queen Tut is emphasizing a Russian link, and she ties a former KGB General’s short recommendation of one of Robert David Steele’s books to support her thesis that Robert David Steele might be a double or even a triple agent.

The Russian link is the latest fad accusation, just as the pedophilia accusation had been widely promoted last year by the social media attention getters. I am not going to go into detail with how Queen Tut lays out her argument that Robert David Steele’s actions match those of Active Measures; but if you are interested, examine her illustrated argument in her Trello Board and listen to her second Hoax Wars video.  My complaint with regard to her presentation of the Active Measures methodology of Robert David Steele is that she has not proven, with hard evidence, the assertions she makes. In fact there can be many reasons unassociated with a Soviet link, that would explain why and how Steele behaves as he does.

At the 38.51 mark, Queen Tut comments, “…basically what I was doing was giving him enough rope to hang themselves, okay?  And they did.  They did hang themselves and here’s the evidence and everyone would be able to see that when they look at the Trello Board, okay.  Now here’s the other thing that I’m going to reveal tonight that’s breaking news.  So everybody, I wanted to share this piece of it because this is significant because it shows how Active Measures are applied against people, and how attorneys with practices will lie, especially when they’re the arm of the Intel Agencies or the Intel Operations who are applying Active Measures against American citizens, for wanting to know the truth, okay?”

She explains, “So perfect example here of what they do to individuals and then we find out here of what they do to individuals and then we find out they, they lie, they don’t care about the law.  This attorney does not care about the law, okay?  Robert David Steele doesn’t care about Americans.  He doesn’t care about them.  He’s working two sides, maybe three, for who knows what kind of compensation, so here’s the big reveal.  This is, I’m gonna leave this hanging a little bit, here’s the reveal.  I am NOT Carla Howell.  Queen Tut is not Carla Howell…(40.35)…then they claimed it was Susan Lutzke, then they claimed that they served Susan Lutzke and she doesn’t even live there, okay?  And now I’m gonna let everybody know I’m not Susan Lutzke…(41.06)   in fact I have sent my birth certificate to the court about 4 or 5 days ago and it is now published on the court, in the court documents who I am, okay?”

Did Queen Tut’s “Big Reveal” clear away the fog surrounding her true identity?

The confusion of Queen Tut’s true identity has not been cleared up, despite the above proclamation.  The letter sent to the court was written by a Mercia Francis, who claims, “I am writing on behalf of my mother, known as Queen Tut…My mother has recently been diagnosed with dementia and I am now overseeing her social media and other affairs.” So why does Queen Tut say she sent the documents to the court?  Is she both Helen Suzanne Ingraham, and Mercia Francis?  Are the statements in these documents true?

At around the 36 minute mark of the Hoax Wars interview, Queen Tut is discussing the false basis on which the court summons of Susan Lutzke had been made, and she comments, “…when you file false affidavits in federal courts that’s serious…”. If there is any part of the documents filed by Queen Tut that are not true, that is also serious.

Assuming the birth certificate is actually that of Queen Tut, will it be shown later that she does not have a medically diagnosed case of dementia, and that this statement is on the artful side when the letter writer declares, “I am concerned about providing an address or contact number because my mother is fearful that Robert David Steele might send someone to harm her.  This fear could be associated with her diagnosis or his CIA background may inform that type of threat. I’m hoping this letter can be filed before any action is taken against the wrong people.”

The civil case legal process is always a slow one, as each side is allowed a time period to respond to the documentation which is filed with the court. So it may be some time before the questions which are presently being raised are answered with facts and evidence. But one item of interest should be noted.  Those who are aware that they are named in a civil case, and deliberately seek to avoid being served in accordance with standard procedures, can be legally brought into the court by other measures.

Since Queen Tut is the anonymous internet handle of a woman who has not been totally forthcoming in providing details of her whereabouts, or her personal history, it is worth mentioning that there was a defamation case filed on February 3, 2009 by Mark and Rhonda Lesher against anonymous message board posters on Topix.com. The judge in that case ordered that the IP addresses be provided in order to identify the persons responsible for posting defamatory comments against the Leshers.  In that particular case, the accusations were very serious ones which caused substantial financial harm,  and were based on false accusations which had been the basis of a criminal complaint. The Leshers were granted a thirteen million dollar judgment in the civil case, which can be read about in the articles linked here and here.

The “giving of enough rope to hang themselves” strategy

A final quote from the Queen Tut in the Hoax Wars interview at about the 42 minute mark is of interest: “…but by writing, which is what I did intentionally, I gave them enough rope to hang themselves.  And that’s a strategic way to deal with bad guys and I’m just sharing this with you guys not, to like you know, for any kind of ego scene.  I just want people to understand that when you’re dealing with evil guys or deal with criminal guys you have to be strategic, okay?  You, you can, you can react all you want and go whoa, I want to stand for truth; that’s one thing, but when you’re dealing with these guys, you have to be very, very strategic and you got to let them screw up and in this situation, they have, very, very profoundly.”

Genuine adversaries or hoaxers?

Perhaps Robert David Steele also has the same identical strategy as Queen Tut, which is to give your adversary enough rope to hang themselves.  It could be that we are witnessing the possibility that there might be two hangings in the making, if each is successful in their goals.  Who knows?  Is this a strategic duel where two adversaries end up doing each other in, a sort of ying/yang karmic cause and effect?  Both Robert David Steele and Queen Tut seem to think that they are unique in representing what has been termed the Internet Truth Movement. But there are so many accusations, so little evidence….truth is being trampled underfoot in the dust…where does that leave those who are willing to stand alone to speak the truth? I must presume that it is those persons who God has chosen to stand against deception, not those anonymous entities without the personal courage and wit to do so.

 

 

 

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “The Strategic Maneuvers of Queen Tut Around the Robert David Steele Defamation Lawsuit

  1. Glad I don’t live in that world. If deception is your game, then the Truth isn’t in you. Can’t say I feel sorry for either side in this as they have deliberately created their situation(s). I do hope for truth and justice to prevail, no matter the final outcome.

  2. Thank you Jacquelyn for writing this article on the mysterious Queen Tut. Hopefully she will now have a better understanding of her true identity, after all, if she actually does suffer from (recently diagnosed) dementia, she may have been confused about who she actually is.

    The purpose of my commentary is to remove any doubt about her true identity. I want her to know that I have no intention of “doxing” her, all I want to do is clean up a loose end that keeps followers of the Webb/Goodman/Trish/Mr. Hudson/Queen Tut/What Big Eyes You Have/ et al. saga in a state of perpetual confusion. Queen Tut is certainly not a prime character in this drama, but if one loose end can be tied off, maybe others can be more fully unraveled so that they can be tied off as well.

    First, I would state that anyone who wants to preserve their real identity from reaching the public should probably not grant interviews, especially on YouTube, because even though they may think they have been careful with the information they share, they may have left enough evidence to pinpoint who they are. Such is the case with Queen Tut; she pretty much spelled it all out in her YouTube video produced by Jason Goodman on August 7, 2017 named “Queen Tut 003”.

    I will not elaborate on the video; it’s publicly available for anyone who wishes to listen to it to confirm what I say here. All I did was use a few key terms that Queen Tut mentioned in the interview to do a web search and I was able to find a link that put enough pieces together for me to believe the person speaking on Goodman’s video is uniquely identified. Of course, if I had a second independent audio source where the woman speaking was identified with her legal name, an audio expert could absolutely confirm her identity with voice recognition software, eliminating any possible remaining doubt, but so little doubt remains now that such analysis is not necessary.

    As Robert David Steele’s attorney has stated in his February 23, 2018 letter to the federal court, included in the blog post previous to this one, Susan(or Sue) A. Lutzke is Queen Tut. Since I do not work with his attorney nor have any association with Robert David Steele, I do not know how they came to their conclusion, but I came to the same conclusion based on my own independent investigation, which did not involve any sources other than what is freely available on the Internet. I will not spell them out, because as I said, I have no desire to “dox” her, I just want everyone to know her identity is no mystery.

    Finally, I want Queen Tut to understand that playing identity games on the Internet (specifically YouTube) is one thing, but acting in bad faith to hide your true identity from a federal court by (falsely) stating you are 80 years old and suffering from dementia is not a “strategy” and will not allow you to “move around deception”. In fact, although I am not an attorney, I recognize willful deception when I see it and this will not bode well for you if this legal action proceeds to discovery and/or trial. You are only creating a larger problem for yourself as long as you proceed down the path you are on, and the sooner you realize that fact, the better off you will be.

    • Bondo, as long as she remains silent, that is much to our gain! I don’t find her “evidence” to be of any value, especially with the self-righteousness I sense coming through her voice. I can honestly say I never had that much interest in QT, and once I posted my long comment above, my interest ceased.

  3. Meroz:
    Is there a video link to the statements that are quoted in your article? I have searched YouTube for the interview that you are writing about but I have not been able to find it.
    Thank you

    • Avery: Yes, I see that my link to the Hoax Wars video is now worthless. As I understand it, someone got Hoax Wars struck from You Tube, and the owner of that channel is attempting to do his videos on another channel. I do not know if that particular video will reappear or not, so I am glad that at least I was able to save a few quotes. Everything surrounding this lawsuit, especially regarding Queen Tut, is peculiar. It is possible that it was Jason Goodman who complained about the statements that QT had been making regarding him that got Hoax Wars in trouble with YouTube. I will be commenting on Goodman’s video with regard to those QT statements, probably tomorrow in a post.

      • Apparently, the strikes On Hoax Wars were about his ‘comedy’ videos exposing Goodman’s teenage dating on Tinder. Those strikes were from Goodman. They were the actual statements from Goodman’s earlier shows were he describes disrobing and other behaviors in front of a computer screen.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.