Pre-Trial Evidence Transmission
Written notice on January 16, 2025 to seven named recipients; fifteen-minute silent visual catalog of the trial exhibit binders — each exhibit held steady on camera for reading — transmitted on the eve of the January 27, 2025 trial date.
OverviewWhat this page documents
This page preserves two documents transmitted in advance of the January 27, 2025 trial date. The first is a written letter sent via Yahoo Mail at 1:40 PM on January 16, 2025 to every defendant, both attorneys of record, the co-complainant, and two third-party witnesses — seven named recipients in total. The second is a fifteen-minute silent visual catalog of the complete trial exhibit binders, filmed page-by-page, each exhibit held steady on camera for the viewer to read. The video was transmitted to the same recipients on the evening before trial.
Both documents were preserved with full Yahoo Mail server headers and timestamps. The letter named, in writing, the evidence that would be presented at trial and the specific warning not to perjure. The video provided the visual counterpart — every exhibit in the binders, shown to the viewer directly, with no narration. Between them, the two transmissions supplied the defendants and their counsel with a complete reading copy of the trial case in advance of the courtroom.
Document OneWritten notice · January 16, 2025
Dear Dr. Phat Tran,
This letter is legally titled for your attention.
Note for the Judge: Phat Tran — your words will be used against you in a Superior Court case on January 27, 2025.
Phat Tran, licensee in the State of California, D.D.S., prescriber of narcotics to others — doctor and such other pre-criminal types — hereby being notified of a number of serious wrongdoings. If in title you know who, and I know who the others are by email — those who are innocent: How the **** are you all?
No one writes back. No mail has been returned. Funny!
I am addressing by certified mail this email exchange — conducted in good faith — to come to a resolution out of court to keep your **** from a collection of criminal charges. By certified mail directly to your beach house — one block from the Pacific Ocean on Highway 1 and Sea Cliff.
This will follow in 72 hours if not the sum of $1,500,000 is tendered to close your trial against us — three to six times what a judge awards for unlawful removal, having jacked the rent up $2,500 a month.
Lots of emails. I reckon she will get mad as **** at me reading them in the mic, good and slow. Well over 100 — with police and such.
I hope you’ve enjoyed kicking us out of our house after making me pay the June rent twice — once by check (and thank you for confirming that Hanson has the check) — and then going to the judge to claim you couldn’t pay your bills, demanding I pay you again directly into your bank account.
Legally, I had three days to comply. And I did. That’s $10,700 from my savings into your personal checking account — according to you.
That must have stumped your pony, because instead of behaving like one, you became a ****. Agreeing to these unlawful terms and writing to you for 40 days and nights, you decided to end your own legal life — along with all your accomplices’ lives — like criminals who blow themselves up in a getaway car.
It is my understanding that within one month, you collected $10,700 from my savings account. As you know, I am a retired senior on Social Security. But that wasn’t enough for you.
You need to bring your boy Hanson Le to court with you so we can figure out the wrongs he helped you commit to cover your financial mess. What the **** was wrong with you?
You forced an old man into court to defend himself — to forgive another $10,700 and replace your carpets we allegedly pissed on. Same stunt you pulled in June — $10,700 into your account. Why not pay a lawyer $850 and get new carpets and back rent? Because he only paid twice last month. He’s good for two more payments.
New charge of perjury: Did I get three years’ depreciation on carpets? You say I lived there three years. Did I get the 60-day notice as required by law from Anna Ly — who opened and closed your lease after 27 early payments were made?
You thought you could go to a Superior Court judge, tell her I didn’t pay you — despite written confirmation thanking me for the cashier’s check, with the words “Hanson has the check” — and demand payment again because you couldn’t manage your bills or get Berkshire to endorse it over to you?
You claimed your partner left the practice and you were stuck with more bills than money. Well, I have never — ever — EVER shared my personal problems with tenants. Did you do something so wrong that it left you with a guilty conscience? I think the jury will agree that you did.
Who, in the name of God — after robbing someone — then kicks them out of their home and gives them a reason for doing it? That’s right. Kicked us out. With $10,700 in your pocket, you had the sheriff tell us they’d lock us out of the house, ruin our credit, and claim we were squatters who pissed on your furniture. You even told the court I didn’t live there a single day.
Yep. I reckon that’s a perjury charge.
But here’s the truth, Your Honor: evidence. This man wrote to me that for three years he didn’t raise the rent — and now he’s claiming I never made a single payment. What happened to payment 25? Most people don’t need to come to court to explain that it follows payment 24.
My heart can’t take this anymore. I told the **** lawyer: here is the **** evidence — the cashier’s check, your letter thanking me for it, and your three-day notice that I paid early. I will address him later.
Then you went back to court, threw us out, and raised the rent $2,500 to solve your problems. Well, let me tell you something: for as happy as I made you, you are going to pay me back threefold.
Then you are going to prison — where you will crack sand with a dental tool.
This letter is for your eyes only — 40 days and nights of correspondence to keep your **** out of state prison. Now, in the position you are in, you are willing and able to let the judge fry all three.
Do not perjure yourself regarding what you have done with those two real estate agents. When the judge reads this at the start of trial, there will be no erasing or ignoring it. Hell will be a better place than the courtroom with me.
It is my wish that the courts make you wait your turn for hell in a cement cell.
Pro Se Complainant · Gasio v. Tran et al.
OC Superior Court No. 30-2024-01410991-CL-UD-CJC
Transmitted: Thursday, January 16, 2025 · 1:40 PM · Yahoo Mail
Words appearing as **** have been redacted of profanity for public dissemination only. No content, position, sequence, or evidentiary substance has been altered. The original letter is retained in full for court and agency use. Original Yahoo Mail records with full server headers and timestamps are preserved and available upon lawful request.
Document TwoSilent visual catalog · eve of trial
A fifteen-minute silent video catalog of the complete trial exhibit binders was transmitted to the same seven recipients on the evening before the January 27, 2025 trial date. The video has no audio commentary. The binders were turned page-by-page on camera; each exhibit was held steady long enough for a viewer to read it. The file was preserved in the Yahoo Mail sent folder. It is embedded below.
Note: This video has no audio track. It is a silent page-by-page catalog of the binder exhibits. Your device speakers do not need to be on. Playback time: approximately fifteen minutes.
The video contains no audio commentary. The binders are turned page-by-page, with each exhibit held on camera long enough to read. The sequence mirrors the organization of the binders carried into court. The exhibits shown include:
The May 28, 2024 Wells Fargo cashier’s check, payable to Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices California Properties, addressed to the BHHS Huntington Beach office at 5848 Edinger Avenue.
The United States Postal Service Certified Mail tracking printout — tracking number 9534914882764149935944 — showing delivery to the addressee on May 30, 2024, signed for by the initials “H. H.”
The Wells Fargo wire-transfer confirmation for the April 19, 2024 payment of $5,000 (Confirmation No. OW00004382456864; memo: “New lease 24 one payment at 5000”), and the June 28, 2024 wire confirmation at the new contractual rate.
The Authentisign lease envelope (Envelope 46CC8725) transmitted on Berkshire Hathaway’s corporate platform on April 26, 2024, with the payment clause directing rent to a Wells Fargo account in Hanson Le’s personal name.
The text message from Dr. Phat Tran to the plaintiff: “Hanson has the check.”
The timestamped photograph of established black mold under the kitchen sink, taken at 11:39 AM on May 1, 2022 — move-in day.
The June 21, 2024 Three-Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit, annotated against Code of Civil Procedure sections 1161 and 1162, identifying the wrong-account, single-envelope-service, and signature defects on the face of the instrument.
The code-violation notes prepared for trial, identifying each documented condition and pairing it with the governing California Civil Code, Health and Safety Code, and Business and Professions Code provision.
DispositionWhat happened next
No recipient transmitted a written correction to any fact stated in the letter. No recipient transmitted a written objection to any exhibit shown in the video catalog. No recipient contacted the plaintiff to dispute the contents of either transmission. No returned mail was received by the plaintiff’s Yahoo Mail account. The matter proceeded to trial on January 27, 2025 with the letter and the video catalog in the inbox of every defendant and both attorneys of record.
At trial, testimony given under oath by the plaintiff landlord regarding the disputed June 2024 payment was contradicted, in the same proceeding, by the plaintiff landlord’s own written admission in evidence — the same “Hanson has the check” text reproduced in the walkthrough above and named in the letter above. When shown the text and asked by the bench “Did you write this?”, the witness answered under oath: “Yes.” That exchange is preserved in the transcript of the January 27, 2025 proceeding.
The legal significance of the pre-trial transmission is that every act taken by every named recipient at and after the trial was taken with documented prior written notice — by name, by exhibit, and by statute — of the evidence that would be presented and of the specific warning not to perjure. The silent visual catalog supplied the same recipients with a reading copy of the exhibits themselves, directly from the binders carried into court. Under the United States Supreme Court’s holding in Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A., 563 U.S. 754 (2011), a defendant who subjectively believes there is a high probability that a fact exists and who takes deliberate actions to avoid learning of that fact is treated, for federal criminal purposes, as having actual knowledge. The pre-trial transmission forecloses the avoidance-of-knowledge defense on the face of the record.