Does anybody know any of the players in this little drama?
It is my understanding that Hodges and Staudt would have good cause for action claiming defamation.
And the Killians certainly have a legal ground for a suit regarding use of personal papers of a deceased man, especially misrepresenting them.
In yet another confirmation that the documents are deliberately forged, CBS claims that *MILITARY ORDERS* are "personal" papers. That can't be true, by definition.
Further, military correspondence *between* officers on official military business (Medicals, flight reviews, officer ratings, et al.) are by definition not personal papers.
In short, the very *claim* that these forged documents are "personal papers" is evidence in and of itself that CBS is publishing deceptive information.
1 Full Legislative Day Left Until The AWB Expires
I certainly hope the have some recourse. What cBS has done is despicable.
I'm not a lawyer, but if I was to take a guess .. depending on all the info, they could file a civil case I would think
IF there was a criminal case it would be forging a military order and forging the signature of a military officer
nope...but here's a bttt
Back in 1986, as a matter of fact- wonder if there were forged documents involved then as well?
1986 : (KERRY LAUNCHES HIS OWN "INVESTIGATION" TO DISCREDIT THE NICARAGUAN RESISTANCE AND THE REAGAN ADMINISTRATION AS WELL AS TO HARASS OPPONENTS OF THE SANDINISTA REGIME) Kerry Launches His Own 'Investigation': Fed by supportive journalists and Washington-based think tanks that supported the Sandinistas, Kerry put his experience as a former assistant county prosecutor to work in 1986, launching a full-scale "investigation" of his own to discredit the Nicaraguan resistance and the Reagan administration. His probe, alleging an international criminal conspiracy, coincided with lawsuits against retired Army Gen. John Singlaub and others in what was called a legal harassment campaign against American opponents of the Sandinista regime, alleging bizarre international plots.The cases collapsed under legal scrutiny but made sensational headlines that fueled Reagan opponents for years. The first significant lawsuit was filed in May of that year by Tony Avirgan and his wife Martha Honey, two U.S. journalists who were open Sandinista sympathizers. Evidence in their lawsuit, much of which Kerry and his staff recycled as public statements, was based "largely on information from a dead informant whom they never met and identified only as 'David X,'" the Washington Times' James Morrison reported at the time. According to Morrison, Avirgan "admitted that he had never met David X," who "was the source of the information of the entire conspiracy."
Fed by Honey and Avirgan, who worked closely with his staff, Kerry gave the false allegations credibility in the press. Despite its accomplishments in muddying the waters of the emotional Central America debate, the Kerry probe kept falling apart. One key witness, British soldier of fortune Peter Glibbery, swore that Kerry staffers bribed him to accuse Sandinista opponents of crimes, only to recant the next day. Others, including a former French soldier named Claude Chaffard, said that Kerry staffers promised to help him out with U.S. visa problems and paid him money while he cooperated.
--Kerry's Disloyal Nicaraguan Journey, by J. Michael Waller, Insight Magazine, May 17, 2004