Nikki Araguz is a fraud

[Natasha]

Nikki Araguz is a fraud

http://ben-girl-notesfromthetside.blogspot.com/2011/05/nikki-araguz-is-fraud.html
5/25/11
By Elizabeth

Under Texas law she does not have a single iota of legal precedent to stand on and she is screwing everyone born transsexual in the State of Texas because it has now supposedly about us. Ironically in a Houston poll, unscientific by a local paper, Texans overwhelming supported the right of transsexuals to legally marry with the implied belief they were post surgical.

I guess I have a little stake in this because I was married in central Texas in the late 80's but unlike Nikki I was17 years post operative. Now the nut-jobs are even after that right and we can thank Nikki Araguz for that.  Nikki has never met a microphone, camera, or reporter she didn't like and even had plans for some foolish reality show about her which i hope is permanently shelved because of this.

[Dawn D.]

I wonder if liable or slander is still enforceable? Seems these are pretty strong statements. Of course if the accusations made are true, likely - no harm no foul. But, isn't "fraud" a pretty serious accusation to declare as a fact?

I ask this because many years ago, I learned from an attorney to always preface a statement about someone else by declaring that it is only your opinion. I don't see such in this case...............?


Dawn 

[Ann Onymous]

Was it a ->-bleeped-<-ty thing for them to post?  Absolutely, especially since it appears to be regurgitation of crap they read elsewhere.  Is it actionable?  In theory.  Would Nikki likely collect on a judgment?  Not likely. 

Are there distasteful things about the factual history?  Sure.  But they are not unique to Nikki's case.  Some of the history is related to what would be described in a arguments before the court as 'youthful indiscretions' (remember that some of the claimed conduct dates back nearly 20 years) with others being in the class of succombing to human frailty (compounded by having driven on a suspended license more than 15 years ago- better put out an all points bulletin).  With rare exception, MOST people have been in a situation where they could have been charged with being under the influence...I know that I COULD have been charged on more than one occasion during my adult years.  There are other specious allegations contained in that blog that have me questioning WHAT criminal history documents the author was looking at because some of the claimed conduct does not comport with the TCIC/NCIC records or even the Harris and Wharton County records.  But hey, because she was charged with something, she must be guiltyso we'll create a blog entry or write a news article to further smear the name...so much for the very presumptions held near and dear to practitioners of criminal defense.

Aside from knowing the backstory in the case, I guess the other thing that pisses me off to no end is seeing the continual piling on by bloggers and others in the media in a manner that seems deliberately calculated to hurt a person I consider a friend.  I also know the impact such reports have had on Nikki's parents...who I am also proud to say I know and who display nothing but unconditional love for their daughter.     

[Suzy]

In one way I am glad this was written.  It at least gives a reality check as to what message is actually getting through from the media. 

As far as I can tell, it is something like:  Since Nikki is a criminal, it necessarily follows that transgendered persons do not deserve their spouse's death benefits.  I know it sounds absurd on the face of it, but this is really the gist of everything now being written.  It is fun, it is so juicy, it is so in vogue, it is too good to pass up, this opportunity to crucify one of our own.  We are so brilliant!  Who cares if no evidence is offered?  Let's swallow everything the media tells us, regardless.  After all, they have always been so supportive of transgendered persons.

Wake up, people!

Kristi

[Dawn D.]

Ann,

Please extend my regards to Nikki and her family. As you've described, people are simply looking for a way to tear down and destroy. In the TS/TG world, it seems there are those looking for a scapegoat, any scapegoat to place blame onto, for the state of our condition (collectively).

It's interesting that they held their tongues to opine until after the Judge's decision.


Dawn

[Shana A]

As News Admin, I read or at least skim everything posted in this section of the forum, and so have seen a number of Elizabeth's blogs which have previously been posted here. This blogger seems to have considerable negativity regarding late transitioners, non TS transgender people, and almost anyone else who isn't adhering to her particular way of being a woman. As a trans sister, I do wish her well, but based on what I've read, also believe she has a lot of unresolved issues to work out.

I don't know Nikki personally, but have followed this case closely via media reports that we've all posted here. What happens in her case has ramifications for all of us. She has my support!

Zythyra

[Zelane]

Its interesting that someone started a thread asking if there exist something called: Trans elitism. Well, here we have a prime example that it does indeed exist.

[Imadique]

I don't know why we keep driving traffic to her blog, she's an idiot and we're amplifying her voice. Never have I seen someone so Transphobic claiming to be Trans themselves.

[Dawn D.]

I don't know why we keep driving traffic to her blog

There's a theory out there. It's an old one; 'keep your friends close and your enemies closer". Not stating that Elizabeth is an enemy. However, I think it is important that in order for everyone to be able to keep a relatively clear and forward focus; to know what those who have voice in whatever capacity are in fact saying. Right or wrong.

Being able to discuss rationally and respectfully (even if it cannot be done so within her blog), seems to kind of clear the air, so to speak, in boards such as Susan's. I see it as a healthy exercise overall.


Dawn

[MillieB]

It's completely irrelevant whether Nikki is a criminal, a saint, a bad person or whatever! This case sets a precedent that will affect the lives of all trans people in Texas and possibly beyond.

This is really dangerous and downright shocking!

[spacial]

It's completely irrelevant whether Nikki is a criminal, a saint, a bad person or whatever! This case sets a precedent that will affect the lives of all trans people in Texas and possibly beyond.

This is really dangerous and downright shocking!

I confess, I have been thinking the same.

My difficulity is the enevitable conclusion that Texas law is not a means of ensureing the comfort and liberty of the majority, but a means for the minority to impose their will.

That would seem to indicate that Texas is not democratic at all. That it is an autocracy.

Yet, I'm not a Texan, nor an American. The messages I hear suggest that the issues are complex, but I don't yet understand why.

The real problem here is that if Texas is to be preceived as a democracy, then its example may extend elsewhere.

Add to this some other recent, much more high profile cases where US law and in at least one example, foreign law has been used as a tool of US political policy. The arrest of the Head of the IMF, his detention in one of the most dreadful prisons available, apparently because he was a flight risk, which suddenly changed when he agreed to resign. (He is apparently no longer a flight risk).

The other case is, of course, of Julian Assange. But that doesn't appear to have had the desired effect. The sebsequent blocking of access to Wikileaks is a preposterus, outragious and illegal  reaction.

The attempts to use law to justify mass murder in the ME and SE Asia are equally farcical. Though few take that seriously. Blair is openly called a liar and a profiteer, even on UK TV.

This may all seem to be a long way from Nikki Araguz. However, while Nikki is not particularly high profile, the corruption of the legal process seem to apply equally to her. Moreover, there may well be numerous such low level cases like Nikki's which are simply not discussed. I wonder how many, with little or no interest in Transgender issues have even heard her name?

I may be wrong, or I may simply have vain hope, but the arrest and treatment of the head of the IMF, for what are clearly political objecitves, might be a step too far. He is, after all, a member of the French ruling classes. And they have a long history of antipathy toward the US ruling classes.

If that does blow up, the trials of Nikki will be relatively insignificant in the scheme of things.

[Elizabethor liz]

I am transphobic because I disagree with some of you? Interesting thought process if there even was a thought process. I am a great believer in redemption and second chances but when criminal activity is habitual then you are what you are.

Nikki Araguz is not a very nice person. I do not know if she is guilty as charged but unfortunately past criminal history and current actions dictate how people are perceived. This Rolex issue is not the only thing she is under investigation for and the other possibilities are quite nasty.

Nikki could have done all of us a favor by simply agreeing that putting her late husbands $600K insurance money in a trust fund for the two children was a wonderful idea but Nikki Araguz has always been about Nikki Araguz and never anyone else. That $600K would have been used to help Nikki make herself happy. Drugs do that to people.

Nikki Araguz is a disaster for all of us born transsexual. Her criminal past is long and varied including fraud, drugs, and theft. Because one is born transsexual/intersexed does not mean one is a honest upstanding citizen. The only thing Nikki was ever upstanding about was standing up for a mug shot of which there are many.

I happen to believe in marriage equality for a simple reasons.  It is common decency to allow two people in love to marry and if the Catholic Church is against it then you know it should be legalized. Unfortunately for Nikki she was not post surgical at the time of her marriage and court records and briefs prove that.

And just to clear up the record.  I was absolutely never "trans".  I was born transsexual and resolved that problem a very long time ago. I do not hate late transitioners but I do find it humorous when some fool shows up claiming they are transsexual because several years ago they had a vision on a Wednesday evening and on Thursday knew they were a "girl". We are born transsexual and thus it does not rear its ugly head after living 50+ years as a man.

It is totally relevant that Nikki has a long criminal past and it is totally relevant that she is still involved in some form of criminal actions. Role models may be reformed criminals but Nikki is far from reformed thus she is not a role model. If she had received that $600K she would have been off to party town while leaving those children penniless. If she had emphasized she wanted to be sure the $600K was put in a trust fund for the children only then she would have a claim but anyone that thinks Nikki Araguz gave one ->-bleeped-<- about those children other than dollar signs is deaf, dumb, and blind.

[Ann Onymous]

Nikki Araguz is not a very nice person. I do not know if she is guilty as charged but unfortunately past criminal history and current actions dictate how people are perceived.

I take umbrage with the description you apply here.  It really makes me wonder if you KNOW her at all.  It would seem you are allowing past missteps (some of which are nearly 20 years old) dictate your opinion.   

Nikki could have done all of us a favor by simply agreeing that putting her late husbands $600K insurance money in a trust fund for the two children was a wonderful idea but Nikki Araguz has always been about Nikki Araguz and never anyone else. That $600K would have been used to help Nikki make herself happy. Drugs do that to people.

oh my god!  does the bull->-bleeped-<- ever stop? 

The only thing Nikki was ever upstanding about was standing up for a mug shot of which there are many.

all I can do is roll my eyes and wonder what in the hell Nikki ever did you for you to insist on the continued potshots. 

It is totally relevant that Nikki has a long criminal past and it is totally relevant that she is still involved in some form of criminal actions. Role models may be reformed criminals but Nikki is far from reformed thus she is not a role model. If she had received that $600K she would have been off to party town while leaving those children penniless. If she had emphasized she wanted to be sure the $600K was put in a trust fund for the children only then she would have a claim but anyone that thinks Nikki Araguz gave one ->-bleeped-<- about those children other than dollar signs is deaf, dumb, and blind.

Her past missteps have NO relevance to the issue of benefits in an estate matter.  Further, there are elements of the Complaint that WILL call into question whether a crime was actually even committed.  Some of those issues are expected to be addressed at the arraignment (which has not previously occurred).  Hell, this case is not even something that has been before the Grand Jury. 

Oh and that 'long criminal past' that you reference really makes me wonder whether you have LOOKED at what the record is comprised of.  Some of those offenses that you seem to be wanting to pine upon include such heinous offenses as driving while the license was suspended and then there was that failure to present ID that was later dismissed.  Alcohol and drug offenses appearing in the record also fall in the category of human frailty...she is NOT the first person who got arrested at a young age for DWI or for a drug offense.  Bad things happen to good people.  I see that sort of thing on a regular basis due to the nature of my work.  Am I thrilled when I see those sorts of histories?  No.  But I am also capable of seeing the HUMAN that is behind the record.  I damned sure am not going to continue kicking them while they are down...

And you final comment about her not carrying for the children...I don't know how much more misguided you can be.  Just...wow.  I'm finding it really difficult to bite my figurative tongue here because I don't know that what I really want to type would make it past the TOS FILTER.  Not to mention that such an assinine comment like you have proferred clearly indicates that you have absolute no compassion for either a person who tragically lost their husband OR for the parents of Nikki who have a renewed hurt everytime someone insists on posting spiteful crap about their daughter.  Nikki does not deserve to be slammed in such a manner and I can guarantee that her parents did nothing to you to warrant such a trashing of the relationship Nikki enjoyed with Thomas and the children. 

[spacial]

It is totally relevant that Nikki has a long criminal past and it is totally relevant that she is still involved in some form of criminal actions. Role models may be reformed criminals but Nikki is far from reformed thus she is not a role model. If she had received that $600K she would have been off to party town while leaving those children penniless. If she had emphasized she wanted to be sure the $600K was put in a trust fund for the children only then she would have a claim but anyone that thinks Nikki Araguz gave one ->-bleeped-<- about those children other than dollar signs is deaf, dumb, and blind.

The payment was a legal entitlement. It would have applied equally if she was an un-reformed criminal.

If past criminal convictions do indeed stain your character, for the rest of your life, that is perhaps a matter for your society, though seems rather harsh and stupid.

To suggest that she should have proposed putting the payment into a trust fund, exclusively for the boys is not  the point. Firstly, it would have been a conscession that she was somehow in the wrong. Do all widows, in that position, put any payments made on behalf of their husbands, into trustfunds for their chidlren?

But more importantly, the payment wasn't to the boys. It was intended for her.

But thank you for the information. It does illustrate some of the attitudes of those locally. (I presume you're local).

[Shana A]

Nikki Araguz is not a very nice person.

[...]

Nikki Araguz is a disaster for all of us born transsexual. Her criminal past is long and varied including fraud, drugs, and theft. Because one is born transsexual/intersexed does not mean one is a honest upstanding citizen. The only thing Nikki was ever upstanding about was standing up for a mug shot of which there are many.

Welcome to Susan's Elizabethorliz

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, and to express them here, however please do so without personal attacks! A reminder of Rule 10 in the TOS.

10. Bashing or flaming of any individuals or groups is not acceptable behavior on this web site and will not be tolerated in the slightest for any reason.  This includes but is not limited to:

    Advocating the separation or exclusion of one or more group from under the Transgender umbrella term
    Suggesting or claiming that one segment or sub-segment of our community is more legitimate, deserving, or more real than any others