Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Spiff; dirtboy
Your Honor, I move that this case be dropped for lack of evidence.

Plea for summary judgement denied. Eyewitness (or, in this case, earwitness) testimony is relevant. Said testimony has not been rebutted. Pleadant Spiff's abject ignorance of the fact that Spencer actually did have a radio show shows that he shouldn't be complaining very loudly about a lack of evidence. Additionally, pleadant Spiff is hereby fined a $500 donation to FR for wasting the court's time by engaging in personal attack against two Freepers.

214 posted on 10/30/2002 3:24:59 PM PST by HoweverComma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies ]


To: HoweverComma
Plea for summary judgement denied. Eyewitness (or, in this case, earwitness) testimony is relevant. Said testimony has not been rebutted. Pleadant Spiff's abject ignorance of the fact that Spencer actually did have a radio show shows that he shouldn't be complaining very loudly about a lack of evidence. Additionally, pleadant Spiff is hereby fined a $500 donation to FR for wasting the court's time by engaging in personal attack against two Freepers.

Your Honor, would you please tell the opposing pleadant to sit down and shut up.

I submit that beyond this single eyewitness's (earwitness's?) questionable and incomplete report of an alleged radio show (he's given no evidence that such a radio show actually exists or existed) upon which an unnamed, allegedly racist guest (he's given no name or date of this alleged incident) was allegedly treated too hospitably by Glenn Spencer that no concrete or credible evidence has been presented to support the allegations.

Further, even if that specific eyewitness testimony was corraborated, it would not come close to proving that Glenn Spencer is, in fact, a racist nor that his organization is, in fact, racist.

I wish to remind the court that proving a negative is impossible. Those making the allegations must prove their case and, given the breathtakingly negligent amount of actual, tangible, verifiable evidence, I submit that the accusers cannot and are instead engaging in baseless smears and perpetuating the false innuendo of the enemy and are not only wasting the court's time but are also engaging in activity which borders upon libel or slander (depending upon how your interpret statements made in an internet forum).

215 posted on 10/30/2002 3:44:22 PM PST by Spiff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson