Another reminder to all May 1st selectees!!!

[Veggie3]

Hi,

On Nov. 26 Mr. Kurzban, the lawyer who filed the appeal, said he only received $2050 so far. Since apparently someone gave $500, it means that maybe only 15 people have donated money.

THIS IS A CALL TO ANY MAY 1ST SELECTEES TO DONATE AS MUCH AS THEY CAN. I can understand that for people from countries where an average monthly salary is $100 to contribute this sum on a lawsuit that has little chance seems crazy.

But for selectees who live in the U.S. (on F, H, J, etc. visas), $100 isn't such a big deal, while being able to get a Green Card IS a huge thing. So please donate as much as you can (last month I donated $100 to Mr. Kurzban) because this appeal is OUR LAST CHANCE TO GET BACK OUR SELECTION!!

 

[Samusoni]

Hi,

On Nov. 26 Mr. Kurzban, the lawyer who filed the appeal, said he only received $2050 so far. Since apparently someone gave $500, it means that maybe only 15 people have donated money.

THIS IS A CALL TO ANY MAY 1ST SELECTEES TO DONATE AS MUCH AS THEY CAN. I can understand that for people from countries where an average monthly salary is $100 to contribute this sum on a lawsuit that has little chance seems crazy.

But for selectees who live in the U.S. (on F, H, J, etc. visas), $100 isn't such a big deal, while being able to get a Green Card IS a huge thing. So please donate as much as you can (last month I donated $100 to Mr. Kurzban) because this appeal is OUR LAST CHANCE TO GET BACK OUR SELECTION!!

It would be good to know the timelines involved here. What has been done; what is expected to be done and when? How realistic is that considering we only have 10 months left in the DV year? Inasmuch as I would like to see a consideration of this, I am not very optimistic, and the lower my optimism is, the less likely that I could part with some $$ to make a donation. SO, give us more details please.

 

[Styles]

Once beaten twice shy

I think many of the ex winners are from Africa and they think that cases against the government are very hard to win ,l think the correct word is impossible and they cannot risk losing their little money in a case that has very little chance of winning.
These people have seen how the judicial system can fail them in their own countries and after what happened during the last hearing and the judges ruling which was given based on Kirit Amins declaration which showed DOS incompetence .Most of the ex winners do not trust the U.S judiciary which showed no compassion at all towards them.
Mr.Kurzban is the best lawyer for this case and lve read his arguments they are superb,but once beaten twice shy.
So many of the people who will donate are from Europe and the ones residing in the U.S.

 

[kunato]

Hi,

On Nov. 26 Mr. Kurzban, the lawyer who filed the appeal, said he only received $2050 so far. Since apparently someone gave $500, it means that maybe only 15 people have donated money.

THIS IS A CALL TO ANY MAY 1ST SELECTEES TO DONATE AS MUCH AS THEY CAN. I can understand that for people from countries where an average monthly salary is $100 to contribute this sum on a lawsuit that has little chance seems crazy.

But for selectees who live in the U.S. (on F, H, J, etc. visas), $100 isn't such a big deal, while being able to get a Green Card IS a huge thing. So please donate as much as you can (last month I donated $100 to Mr. Kurzban) because this appeal is OUR LAST CHANCE TO GET BACK OUR SELECTION!!

Who is Mr. Kurzban? In which state does he practice law? Is he a member of the bar association of that state? Where can the current state of his license be checked? Where can details regarding the case he represents be obtained? Did he sign a legal agreement with anyone showing how will he use the money he receives? Where can this legal agreement be accessed? Is there an invoice stating how much it will cost him to process the appeal? Where is that invoice? How do we know at what stage this appeal is? Where can appeal info be obtained? How much time is there left? All Dv 2012 visas must be issued by Sep 30, 2012. What guarantees are there that appeal case will be adjudicated by that date?

I think that if anyone is asking a person in Nigeria, Sri Lanka, Namibia, Ethiopia or any other country, to donate part of their $10 a MONTH income, then the donors are entitled to know how that money is being spent, especially in the current economy we have in the world. Some people live off of less than $1 a day.

I get every week spam email from someone in Great Britain, asking me to send him money and that he will secure me green card through diversity lottery. How do I know who I am sending money to and how that money will be spent?

 

[Veggie3]

Some answers

Kunato- sorry for not attaching earlier some links about Mr. Kurzban and his law firm:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ira_J._Kurzban

He's a Miami-based attorney who is one of the leading immigration lawyers in the U.S. He's the "former President (1987–88) of the American Immigration Lawyers Association and has also served as the association's General Counsel. He was also called a "legend in the field" and listed among the world's most highly regarded individuals in the International Who's Who of Corporate Immigration Lawyers".

Here's the link to his law firm: http://www.kkwtlaw.com/Bio/IraKurzban.asp

Regarding the timeline: that depends on the court. Kurzban already filed a motion to expedite the proceedings, DOS filed their objections, and on Nov. 25 he filed his response to DOS. ALL those documents can be seen at http://diversityvisa2012.blogspot.com/. There you can see how to donate.

Look folks, I totally agree that if you're in Africa and don't make even $100 a month then you shouldn't contribute. No question. I also agree that if a Green Card isn't important to you, you shouldn't donate. My appeal is aimed at people who already live in the U.S. (or in the West), and to whom a Green Card is important. I live in the U.S. and to me a Green Card is very important. It's a huge thing, and in order to get back my selection I was willing to pay $100.

So if the GC is important to you, you should donate NOW!!

 

[kunato]

Kunato- sorry for not attaching earlier some links about Mr. Kurzban and his law firm:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ira_J._Kurzban

He's a Miami-based attorney who is one of the leading immigration lawyers in the U.S. He's the "former President (1987–88) of the American Immigration Lawyers Association and has also served as the association's General Counsel. He was also called a "legend in the field" and listed among the world's most highly regarded individuals in the International Who's Who of Corporate Immigration Lawyers".

Here's the link to his law firm: http://www.kkwtlaw.com/Bio/IraKurzban.asp

Regarding the timeline: that depends on the court. Kurzban already filed a motion to expedite the proceedings, DOS filed their objections, and on Nov. 25 he filed his response to DOS. ALL those documents can be seen at http://diversityvisa2012.blogspot.com/. There you can see how to donate.

Look folks, I totally agree that if you're in Africa and don't make even $100 a month then you shouldn't contribute. No question. I also agree that if a Green Card isn't important to you, you shouldn't donate. My appeal is aimed at people who already live in the U.S. (or in the West), and to whom a Green Card is important. I live in the U.S. and to me a Green Card is very important. It's a huge thing, and in order to get back my selection I was willing to pay $100.

So if the GC is important to you, you should donate NOW!!

Here is the reason why I will NOT donate:

(1) Lawyer's official website (http://www.kkwtlaw.com/Bio/IraKurzban.asp) did not endorse website http://diversityvisa2012.blogspot.com/ (e.g. by providing direct web/internet link FROM lawyer's website TO the "blogspot" website, and not the other way around, which is what anyone could do). Hence, the credibility of latter (blogspot) website is questionable.

(2) http://diversityvisa2012.blogspot.com website states

"The amount so far is insufficient to cover the expenses we are paying out of our own pocket, let alone our fees."
What is the exact dollar amount of these expenses? Where is the proof how much litigation actually costs? How do we know how little $2,000 is?

(3) http://diversityvisa2012.blogspot.com website states in Point #2
"· The first draw was indeed random because it was not conducted according to any rule, method or strategy."

The May 1st lottery draw was suspended (cancelled) specifically because there WAS a rule/method/strategy on how selectees were drawn: the first 20,000 selectees were selected from those applicants who submitted application within the first 3 day of application period.

This is NOT random selection.

Random selection should have included the ENTIRE PERIOD of DV visa applications...that is, the entire 30 day period as opposed to the first 3-day period. Basically, May 1 draw put those applicants who submitted their application during the first 3 days at unfair advantage against those who submitted in the subsequent 27 days. That is unfair advantage.

The US website clearly stated these reasons:
http://montreal.usconsulate.gov/con...isas&document=2012DiversityVisaLotteryProgram
"The results were not valid because, owing to a computer error, they did not represent a fair, random selection of entrants, as required by U.S. law."

On the contrary, the second draw on July 15 was FAIR, because all applicants who submitted during 30-day period had EQUAL chances of being selected (and not just those who submnitted during first 3 days).

http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_5561.html

"Applicants registered for the DV-2012 program were selected at random from 14,768,658 qualified entries (19,672,268 with derivatives) received during the 30-day application period that ran from noon on October 5, 2010, until noon, November 3, 2010. "


I understand the disappointment of those who have been selected during May 1 draw, but if a computer program made an error, we can just be happy that that error was corrected by humans and that EVERYONE who submitted their application had EQUAL chances of being selected NO MATTER WHEN they submitted their application within 30-day period.

 

[Veggie3]

I don't think the argument is about randomness anymore

Kunato - let me guess: you're not one of the 22,000, right?

In any case, if you read carefully Kurzban's first appeal document (Sep. 9), he doesn't go for the random selection argument, but rather the broken contract: each of the 22,000 people who checked their status has a FORMAL letter from the U.S. government offering them the opportunity to pursue permanent residence.

Those letters were sent by mistake? Due to a "computer glitch" (yeah, right, no humans are responsible...)? Due to the fact that David Donahue didn't brush his teeth on May 1?

WHO CARES??? If a casino says you won something and then retracts, will any bull&*% about a computer "glitch" would have been accepted? I'm not talking about a misprint in a newspaper (because that's unofficial anyway), but a FORMAL letter from the casino/lottery that you've won.

We were wronged by indifferent and incompetent bureaucrats (something that the DOS own report, published recently by the OIG has now revealed) and that should be corrected. There shouldn't be a problem to add the 22,000 to those who won the July 15 drawing.

Even if our chances are slim, we should try and support this case - IF THE CHANCE TO GET A GREEN CARD IS IMPORTANT TO YOU PLEASE DONATE!!!

 

[kunato]

Kunato - let me guess: you're not one of the 22,000, right?

In any case, if you read carefully Kurzban's first appeal document (Sep. 9), he doesn't go for the random selection argument, but rather the broken contract: each of the 22,000 people who checked their status has a FORMAL letter from the U.S. government offering them the opportunity to pursue permanent residence.

Those letters were sent by mistake? Due to a "computer glitch" (yeah, right, no humans are responsible...)? Due to the fact that David Donahue didn't brush his teeth on May 1?

WHO CARES??? If a casino says you won something and then retracts, will any bull&*% about a computer "glitch" would have been accepted? I'm not talking about a misprint in a newspaper (because that's unofficial anyway), but a FORMAL letter from the casino/lottery that you've won.

We were wronged by indifferent and incompetent bureaucrats (something that the DOS own report, published recently by the OIG has now revealed) and that should be corrected. There shouldn't be a problem to add the 22,000 to those who won the July 15 drawing.

Even if our chances are slim, we should try and support this case - IF THE CHANCE TO GET A GREEN CARD IS IMPORTANT TO YOU PLEASE DONATE!!!

"Those letters were sent by mistake? "
No letters were sent for DV2012!....selectees had to log in to the website to check their status. The status page does have a "letter-look-a-like" feel, but that confirmation is computer generated much in the same way that bank account statements and credit card statement LETTERS are auto-generated these days.

"WHO CARES???"
The applicants who submitted after the 4th day last year care, because they didn't have equal chances of winning like those applicants who submitted during the first 3 days of application time frame.

I'm surprised you show sensitivity to applicants to applicants who were selected in May 1 draw as a consequence of a software error, but utter ignorance towards those who were negatively affected by the same software error.

That is rather selfish.

 

[Veggie3]

The fact those letters were computer-generated has no meaning: they're formal letters by the DOS for every intent and purpose, and the fact the DOS issued them by mistake is their problem, not that of the 22,000.

Second, the applicants who submitted after the 4th day were already remedied, since there was a redraw, and I don't see any court reversing that. But adding the 22,000 to the July 15th winners would simply correct the injustice that was inflicted upon them.

 

[kunato]

The fact those letters were computer-generated has no meaning: they're formal letters by the DOS for every intent and purpose, and the fact the DOS issued them by mistake is their problem, not that of the 22,000.

Second, the applicants who submitted after the 4th day were already remedied, since there was a redraw, and I don't see any court reversing that. But adding the 22,000 to the July 15th winners would simply correct the injustice that was inflicted upon them.

- to your first thing: DOS corrected the problem and redid the lottery.

- to your second thing:there is nothing to reverse in second drawing because the draw was made according to the rules of random selection.

- adding 22,000 from May 1st draw to 55,000 of Jul 15 draw is unfair to those from May 1 draw who were OMITTED (NOT selected) because of computer flaw.

- adding 20,000 (from May 1) to the pool of 100,xxx (from July 15), would put July 15 selectees at a disadvantage since 120,xxx as opposed to 100,xxx would "run" for 55,000 of visa slots available. This is unfair to July 15 selectees.

Your reasoning is flawed and illogical.

- lastly, (to point from one of your previous remarks), it is irrelevant whether I was selected OR not selected, in May 1 OR July 15 draw. However, I might as well be the one NOT selected neither on May1 NOR on July 15; and in that case I wouldn't want those from May to have unfair advantage over me.

You show unusual sensitivity for those who were positively affected by software error on May 1, but at the same time demonstrate utter ignorance of those who were NEGATIVELY affected by software error on May 1.

That's quite selfish of you.

I would never give a dime to a person like you, let alone fund a process that will validate the 20,000 selectees from May 1, and make those who were NOT selected on May 1st, feel even worse.

 

[Veggie3]

Turning sour, aren't you?

Kunato,

Though I hardly want to, you've made me stoop to your level, since you insist on turning to personal invectives. So here goes:

I don't give a flying f&*% what you think about me or about anything else. If the court will decide to accept our appeal it'll be great. And if not, so be it.

End of story.

And in the meantime, anyone who has an indeed selfish interest in trying to validate the May 1 selection, PLEASE DONATE!!

 

[kunato]

Kunato,

Though I hardly want to, you've made me stoop to your level, since you insist on turning to personal invectives. So here goes:

I don't give a flying f&*% what you think about me or about anything else. If the court will decide to accept our appeal it'll be great. And if not, so be it.

End of story.

And in the meantime, anyone who has an indeed selfish interest in trying to validate the May 1 selection, PLEASE DONATE!!

I doubt that the court will rule in favor of 20,000 selectees in May 1st drawing.
At the same time, you seem to have run out of arguments, since I pointed out your flawed reasoning, and narcissistic nature hiding behind it.

Lastly, anyone can build a webpage asking for money....just like the "BLOG" webpage asking for donations to fund an appeal, without disclosing exact amount of dollars that is required for the appeal process....very suspicious.

 

[raevsky]

Yes, I am pretty sure Kurzban's work should be appreciated by May 1st winners. Lawyers do not work for free in this country, as White and Kurzban are trying to do.
Definitely, they have other incentives (like Kuzrban could defeat Chevron doctrine and make a lot of milage of that). However, they risk too. White's actions were classified by court as attempts to make a hash of the statute and defy common sense. Most likely, something like that is going to happen to Kuzrban as well. Definitely, they feel shame at those moments and deserve a lot of monetary compensation for it.
I am also pretty sure the solution he is seeking for involves decreasing chances of July 15th pool to get visas for the sake of May 1st winners. However, the likelyhood of any May 1 st winner to get a visa as a result of this suit is so small that July 15th winners have nothing to worry about.
On the other hand, I do not appreciate Kumato's argument that a person who is not a winner of either pool should be jealous to may pool unfairly added to the pool of winners.
This process has nothing to do with fairness, this is all about the standard of deference (Chevron). I also think if White and Kurzban understood the concept of randomness from the very beginning, they would not participate.

At the same time the quality of Kuzrban's work hardly depends on the amount of donations. So, calm down, both veggie and kumato. He definitely produced legal arguments of superb quality that would however not make the May drawing sound random. The definition of random from 100 year old dictionary is an absolute absurd.

However, needless to say, if it were not absurd, Kurzban would easily win this case. His legal arguments are perfect, but still could not make white look black or black look white.

 

[kunato]

Yes, I am pretty sure Kurzban's work should be appreciated by May 1st winners. Lawyers do not work for free in this country, as White and Kurzban are trying to do.
Definitely, they have other incentives (like Kuzrban could defeat Chevron doctrine and make a lot of milage of that). However, they risk too. White's actions were classified by court as attempts to make a hash of the statute and defy common sense. Most likely, something like that is going to happen to Kuzrban as well. Definitely, they feel shame at those moments and deserve a lot of monetary compensation for it.
I am also pretty sure the solution he is seeking for involves decreasing chances of July 15th pool to get visas for the sake of May 1st winners. However, the likelyhood of any May 1 st winner to get a visa as a result of this suit is so small that July 15th winners have nothing to worry about.
On the other hand, I do not appreciate Kumato's argument that a person who is not a winner of either pool should be jealous to may pool unfairly added to the pool of winners.
This process has nothing to do with fairness, this is all about the standard of deference (Chevron). I also think if White and Kurzban understood the concept of randomness from the very beginning, they would not participate.

At the same time the quality of Kuzrban's work hardly depends on the amount of donations. So, calm down, both veggie and kumato. He definitely produced legal arguments of superb quality that would however not make the May drawing sound random. The definition of random from 100 year old dictionary is an absolute absurd.

However, needless to say, if it were not absurd, Kurzban would easily win this case. His legal arguments are perfect, but still could not make white look black or black look white.

" am also pretty sure the solution he is seeking for involves decreasing chances of July 15th pool to get visas for the sake of May 1st winners. However, the likelyhood of any May 1 st winner to get a visa as a result of this suit is so small that July 15th winners have nothing to worry about."

what makes you so sure about it?


The problem is that "A" website ("a blogsite") is asking to donate money to "Someone" without transparency of who receives this money and how that money is being used.

I have received way too many email spams asking for my money for DV lottery...How do I know who is "behind" the Blogsite?

 

[raevsky]

" am also pretty sure the solution he is seeking for involves decreasing chances of July 15th pool to get visas for the sake of May 1st winners. However, the likelyhood of any May 1 st winner to get a visa as a result of this suit is so small that July 15th winners have nothing to worry about."

what makes you so sure about it?

Because may lottery was not random.

The problem is that "A" website ("a blogsite") is asking to donate money to "Someone" without transparency of who receives this money and how that money is being used.

I have received way too many email spams asking for my money for DV lottery...How do I know who is "behind" the Blogsite?

You never know. You could inquire from Kurzban though - his email is on his company's website.

 

[kunato]

You never know. You could inquire from Kurzban though - his email is on his company's website.

Yeah, but why isn't information about costs publicly disclosed? Why aren't invoices disclosed? This is like paying for something that doesn't have its price tag?

It's like saying,...look...you can have this coat, but we can't tell you the price of this coat. You have to pay to someone for this coat, but we won't give you a receipt for it; and of course, there are no refunds...Oh btw,...once you pay for the coat, you're actually not guaranteed to get it. Oh, one last thing (kind of most important thing), when you pay, you don't don't actually know know whether you're paying for this coat, o whether your money is going somewhere else.

 

[raevsky]

I guess his company does not have a lot of competitors. So he does not care about winning conracts by doing those things. But that is my guess, I really do not know

 

[Znayko]

I have read this topic and want to give some points about this.

First of all, if we suggest that the selection on 1 May wasn’t random so as result of it we will get that everyone has knew about computer glitch and still ran it. However, In the OIG report we can read what is was surprise and program was never tested, and no one expected it.

Secondly, Even if program would work correct it still doesn’t produce true random because we can’t get random numbers by computer software, all what computer can is calculation and no part for true random. Moreover, according to Mr. Amin’s text it’s not random in selection and it is a sorting algorithm using pseudo random numbers. So rules about random doesn’t work in our case.

Thirdly, the lottery regulation in 1994 doesn’t changed at all since was used letters and no computer program or whatever. And the meaning of randomness is not based on any previous regulation or interpretation of previous regulation about computer generated results what is used by DoS in court.

Finally, in the lottery there is no place for any type of discrimination, for example by religion or sex orientation. And what was seen in 1 May it was discrimination by fact what 90% was in first two days. The lottery chooses people, only people, and using the fact of current education and country of born, it doesn’t choose people by date or religion or sex orientation. For lottery there is no difference at all when you have registered. As result of it we can’t use what 90% in first two days as matter for annulations. Moreover, it is illusion what not all people participate in lottery, all was, and if we concentrate in fact about 90% we also can say it about usual lottery, because lottery chooses only 100K and always there are people who is not selected. And not all records are viewed; if someone try to see all 19 million records he literally will be absolutely crazy.

To sum up, we have a brilliant lawyer and he agreed to work with ours case while he doesn’t have enough money. But it not free and we need donations, the lawyer’s office collects donations directly and you can sure he will get it. As proof what it is real you may see the page and there are letters from lawyer and his email. In addition, to participate in immigration law process not needs to be licensed in any particular state. And bear in mind you can be in any country but always regretting that you really had a chance but didn’t use it. This case is really complicated, but we have a little chance. In the morning of someday yours kids would say mummy or pappy – why am I not in USA? And you would say that you were too lazy for donate only 100$ to the lawyer.

 

[raevsky]

I have read this topic and want to give some points about this.

First of all, if we suggest that the selection on 1 May wasn’t random so as result of it we will get that everyone has knew about computer glitch and still ran it. However, In the OIG report we can read what is was surprise and program was never tested, and no one expected it.

This statement is totally wrong. There is no connection between the selection being random and anybody knowing about the glitch. It was not random whether anybody know about the glitch or not.

Secondly, Even if program would work correct it still doesn’t produce true random because we can’t get random numbers by computer software, all what computer can is calculation and no part for true random. Moreover, according to Mr. Amin’s text it’s not random in selection and it is a sorting algorithm using pseudo random numbers. So rules about random doesn’t work in our case.

This statement is totally wrong. Pseudo random numbers are still random even not truly random.

Thirdly, the lottery regulation in 1994 doesn’t changed at all since was used letters and no computer program or whatever.

That is totally wrong. They already used computer program in 1994 for random selection.

And the meaning of randomness is not based on any previous regulation or interpretation of previous regulation about computer generated results what is used by DoS in court.

The meaning of randomness is still based on 1994 definition. The one defined via computer software. All other definitions of random made by US government agencies still distinguish between random and haphazard, stating haphazard is not appropriate as a substitute for random.

Finally, in the lottery there is no place for any type of discrimination, for example by religion or sex orientation. And what was seen in 1 May it was discrimination by fact what 90% was in first two days. The lottery chooses people, only people, and using the fact of current education and country of born, it doesn’t choose people by date or religion or sex orientation. For lottery there is no difference at all when you have registered. As result of it we can’t use what 90% in first two days as matter for annulations. Moreover, it is illusion what not all people participate in lottery, all was, and if we concentrate in fact about 90% we also can say it about usual lottery, because lottery chooses only 100K and always there are people who is not selected. And not all records are viewed; if someone try to see all 19 million records he literally will be absolutely crazy.

The selection was not random because random selection was not applied at all. The entries went to selection queue in the same order Oracle selected them. Oracle does not do random selection, only haphazard one. The fact that more than 90% of enties were selected from the first two days is a definite proof it was not random.

To sum up, we have a brilliant lawyer and he agreed to work with ours case while he doesn’t have enough money. But it not free and we need donations, the lawyer’s office collects donations directly and you can sure he will get it. As proof what it is real you may see the page and there are letters from lawyer and his email. In addition, to participate in immigration law process not needs to be licensed in any particular state. And bear in mind you can be in any country but always regretting that you really had a chance but didn’t use it. This case is really complicated, but we have a little chance. In the morning of someday yours kids would say mummy or pappy – why am I not in USA? And you would say that you were too lazy for donate only 100$ to the lawyer.

There is a definite proof the lawyer really works on the case - court documents area available. However, there is no proof those emails really come from that lawyer. That is what the previos posts were saying.

 

[Znayko]

This statement is totally wrong. There is no connection between the selection being random and anybody knowing about the glitch. It was not random whether anybody know about the glitch or not.

Ok, I will go to casino and chose number five and black, and, for example, I have won. You say that there is no random because the number and colour was chosen by human and not used computer software. If it not so you could predict exactly which colour and number need to, and go on dude, you will be a millionere.

This statement is totally wrong. Pseudo random numbers are still random even not truly random.

Right, I will give you a calculator which can do plus, minus and multiply, give me random numbers, please.

The meaning of randomness is still based on 1994 definition. The one defined via computer software. All other definitions of random made by US government agencies still distinguish between random and haphazard, stating haphazard is not appropriate as a substitute for random.

For us it's a black box and we don't know what is happened in it. Did they use software? Is software selected people?

The selection was not random because random selection was not applied at all. The entries went to selection queue in the same order Oracle selected them. Oracle does not do random selection, only haphazard one. The fact that more than 90% of enties were selected from the first two days is a definite proof it was not random.

Ok, We see and the fact that 90% of who won are muslim so in your logic we will annulate lottery. Great!

There is a definite proof the lawyer really works on the case - court documents area available. However, there is no proof those emails really come from that lawyer. That is what the previos posts were saying.

Ohh, my God! There is a phone number of lawyer, please phone him and ask. I think that you are really out of mind.