Reply #19: Oh Jim, since you are here, we have some questions

[lala_rawraw]

1. Why did you leave out that Heather went to the park of her own volition to talk to me and sat with me for around an hour? Did she deny this? If not, why did you exclude this from your article?

2. Did she tell you that I ever contacted her before or since? Did she deny this? If not, why did you not include it?

3. You say that Heather and I talked about vote flipping. How did you go about verifying this? And since you left out that she met with me, how did she and I have this discussion?

4. Given that Heather only ever met ME, not my editor or anyone else, I find it strange that she would want to file a restraining order against my boyfriend. Did she actually tell you this?

5. Why did you report that I met with a daughter, when in fact I met only the son? How did you verify this?

6. If she was going to file a restraining order, as you claim, how did you verify this? Did you contact the lawyers? What did they say? What would be the grounds for a restraining order given that I met with her once, of her own choice, in a public park?

7. Why did she not file the restraining order?

8. How can Mike have denied talking to me IF I ONLY came forward AFTER he died? How did you verify this? Because Heather told you? Is that it?

10. Why did you include the Channel 19 report, which we (the self-styled reporters) that we are had already debunked it? How did you confirm this report? Did you reach the source for the Channel 19 report?

11. Who sent Heather these alleged threats via postcard and may we please see the postcard? The implication is that I was involved and since you don't intend to correct the record, then we would like to see the postcard. I think everyone - all of us self-style reporters, bloggers, and whatever, want to see this astonishing array of evidence.

12. Why did you lie in the last DU thread when you said you made no effort to contact me, when in fact, you sent me an email on 1/13 asking me if I lived in Ohio and if we could get together to discuss "this strange case?" You submitted your draft shortly thereafter.

13. Did Mr. Cole say these things about me, on the record? If so, please make that available to us. As I noted upthread, I have a very different version of events from him. And I think you will find that no one you cite is remotely happy with your article. As I noted, your publisher and editor will get a copy of this email.

In short, you have some nerve. Regardless of what you think of me - and believe me, at this point I take it as a compliment - you are obligated to print my response. Choosing NOT to because YOU DECIDED what YOU THINK happened, is not journalism. You should know that, you big important "real" reporter you.

And coming around and spreading more lies to defend yourself only adds to the obvious intent to defame, which is the only thing missing from a defamation case. We have the proof of BS, we just had to prove intent. You have helped us by proving that you had no intention of writing the truth and continue to defend yourself by defaming me.

Finally, does your editor know that you publicly admitted that you never had any intention of allowing me to respond?