"Nigel Brooks" <nbrooks@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:69ledlF33ghn9U1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "DGVREIMAN" <dgvreiman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:3Pidne0vi5Lw2KjVnZ2dnUVZ_v7inZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> "Nigel Brooks" <nbrooks@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:69k6pgF31og69U1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> "DGVREIMAN" <dgvreiman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:c_udnTpO9pE4QqnVnZ2dnUVZ_tjinZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>
>>>> "Mac" <NoSpamToday@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>> news:eec734phnnd6qc3v8kl07t2ulfpdkdvgkb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> On Tue, 20 May 2008 15:41:11 -0400, Sharky <sharky@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Messrs: Stevel/Paul Carrier/Dennis McDonnell, including all other
>>>>>>false
>>>>>>names you may use, you are hereby once again notified to cease and
>>>>>>desist your cyberstalking such as reposting forged FBI do***ents
>>>>>>about
>>>>>>me, and cease and desist your intentional copyright infringements
>>>>>>and
>>>>>>violations or face legal action.
>>>>>
>>>>> ========== ====
>>>>> Go pound sand...
>>>>> Apparently you have had a relapse.
>>>>> Once again you are claiming that several different people are one
>>>>> person.
>>>>> When next you talk to those "legal-experts" to whom you present
>>>>> a
>>>>> very one-sided, biased discussion, ask them to help you read
>>>>> simple
>>>>> HEADERS....
>>>>> Jeez!
>>>>> --Mac
>>>>
>>>> Doug's Rebuttal:
>>>>
>>>> Mr. McDonnell, are you claiming that you have not posted under fake
>>>> names in respect to posts about or directed to me? BWHAHAHAHAHAHA.
>>>>
>>>> Moreover, you were already offered the op****tunity to provide any
>>>> and all evidence you wished to present to the INDEPENDENT legal and
>>>> military experts I have retained to justify your volumes of false
>>>> accusations about me and my service. So far you have ignored that
>>>> offer and snipped it out of your replies.
>>>>
>>>> If you post your evidence to back up your accusations about me you
>>>> can be sure the experts will receive it and will consider it before
>>>> they render an opinion, and they will reconsider their opinion if
>>>> they have already rendered an opinion, especially if the evidence
>>>> is new.
>>>>
>>>> They are NOT going to get involved with a gang of smear merchants
>>>> on USENET that are not interested in the truth, and use several
>>>> fake names to further their fraud and cyberstalking. But they will
>>>> read all sides of an issue before they render their opinion.
>>>> Obviously your claim of me presenting them with a biased discussion
>>>> is a lie, if you disagree, please provide your evidence.
>>>>
>>>> Those experts have a reputation, they will not lie for you nor for
>>>> me. They are interested in facts and evidence, which is what I am
>>>> also interested in. The days of smear gangs' lying and then
>>>> sup****ting those lies with volumes of fake named posts to smear and
>>>> defame their targeted victims are over. However, I must warn you
>>>> that if you attempt to falsify evidence, or lie about me or such
>>>> evidence, such fraud could be used against you in a court of law
>>>> when these experts testify.
>>>>
>>>> Time to walk the walk Mr. McDonnell. I have replied to you only to
>>>> again offer you the op****tunity to provide your evidence to sup****t
>>>> your accusations about me if you have any. If not, then I will
>>>> assume you are simply deliberately lying.
>>>>
>>>> Moreover, since you and your "friends" have often repeated the
>>>> fraud Tom Rau has posted about me, I suggest you read the following
>>>> rebuttal to Mr. Rau's lies before you dream up some more false
>>>> accusations about me.
>>>>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/447mjw
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Doug Grant (Tm)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Mr. Reimans experts (COD):
>>>
>>>
http://law.justanswer.com/questions/15ukz-usenet-libel-defamation-question
>>>
>>> http://military-law.justanswer.com/questions/13ytr-searching-person
>>>
>>> --
>>> Nigel Brooks
>>
>> Doug Says: Mr. Brooks I have used experts on that forum and other
>> experts as well not on that forum. The experts that will testify in
>> court and the ones I am using primarily are not of that forum.
>> However, if you wish to use the retired First Sergeant as a reviewing
>> expert in respect to your claims, I will be glad to consult him
>> again. Do you have any new evidence to back up your accusations
>> about me? If you do please present it and I will present him with
>> your evidence and my rebuttal, and we shall let the chips fall where
>> they may.
>>
>> Doug Grant (Tm)
>>
>
> You are joking right?
>
> Do you really expect that I would trust you to provide Ed with the
> information that I utilized in arriving at my conclusions?
>
> Tell you what - I will present my the information that I utilized in
> arriving at the conclusion you have lied - at the appropriate time and
> place of my choosing.
>
> I feel confident that given all of the facts - your "experts" will
> agree with me.
>
> Nigel Brooks
Doug Says: Mr. Brooks, I will publish your evidence and my rebuttal in
the same question to Ed. When he publishes his answer the question he
is answering will be published right along with it. So you do not need
to trust me, only him, and he will not lie for either of us. You
already know this, so why duck and dodge a simple independent review of
your false accusations if you were "confident" that independent expert
would agree with you? Why not even go to independent arbitration loser
pays if you are so confident? I am confident that all experts will
agree with me, and ALL I have consulted so far have done precisely that.
We all know that you jumped to false conclusions about me Mr. Brooks,
and we all know that after you stick your neck out with those false
conclusions, and it gets chopped off with the truth, you run around like
a chicken with its head chopped off lying, blustering, lying and
blustering and producing "evidence" that is both ridiculous and
irrelevant (such as producing statements by Chip that you know I nor my
typist never read or knew about and claiming something we clearly did
not know about should have been considered by us when we replied to
Chip - while hiding all the times as far back as 1998 when I said I did
not have a Purple Heart Medal in a court action, and all subsequent
times I said the same).
You act as if you have never made a mistake, or you cannot make a
mistake. Your conclusions about me were wrong, false, and you are
finding that out, and you are making a fool out of yourself by sticking
with your false conclusions and statements. But making a further fool
out of yourself in is up to you. I have offered you an op****tunity to
provide a third independent expert your evidence sup****ting your
accusations and I will produce my rebuttals, and let the experts sort
out the truth - yet you run and hide and find some flimsy and
transparent excuse not to allow that to happen.
And we both know the reason why. Stop it Brooks! Admit you erred and
go on with your life, and if you continue your attacks this issue will
just keep going up to a new levels until you and your gang are going to
end up paying a lot of money for your false conclusions and
accusations.. . but then if that is the way you want it I am your
huckleberry.
Do you think I enjoy embarrassing you and Rau and the other members of
the gang by proving you and they lied about me? I have much better
things to do, and my schools are going to reopen soon and then you and
gang will be dealing with in-house counsel and I will be out of it
anyway. I hate to embarrass fellow vets (I have no sympathy for the
SteveL cyberstalker and he and I are going to the legal mat regardless)
but I do feel sorry for you and some of your Brownies, well, sorta,
especially considering in my opinion I have not even started to defend
myself yet.
Doug Grant (Tm)
>
>
|
