I've never been quite so confident about winning the law suits as I am right now. It seems even Free-angelo's own lawyer has doubts about their case against Hannabelle. I'm not a lawyer, (although I've certainly learned a lot in this past year of sewage), but even I can tell that their case stinks.
One by one, their lawyer's arguments crumble away. So he just invents new ones. He's backed off the fixation on the FBI, after he finally seems to understand that the FBI has indeed been investigating. What's funny is: I told D'Angelo back in December 2007 (just prior to the first lawsuit) that the FBI was involved. Is it my fault that he didn't believe me???? So sue me.
Now he's saying that my calling D'Angelo a "liar" and a "snake" probably isn't defamation after all. Then why did they sue me for saying these things in the first place if even THEY know it is not defamation??? I knew it wasn't defamation when I wrote it. Or I wouldn't have written it. Hannabelle does NOT defame anyone. It is not my fault if Free-angelo defamed themselves by their own bad actions. I just called them on it. In order for me to have defamed them, I would have had to tell untruths about them. I have told the Truth. And as old Bill Hill said: everyone's entitled to their opinion. I admit to being highly opinionated... And when it comes to Nexusians, I am LOWly opinionated. BUT - I have not done anything wrong. A "snake" is a metaphor. And the other thing? Well, I have proof. :) So anyway, he's backing off the liar and snake stuff.
Still holding fast to the "predator" thing... although that, too is just a metaphor, an opinion. I was surprised to hear that they took that to mean something sexual. Like a sexual predator. I NEVER SAID THAT nor did I imply that. I believe it is clear in my article that I was talking about such correctional institutions who bully themselves into places they are not wanted - choosing neighborhoods like ours to infiltrate because we don't have the strength or the money to fight them. Why they would equate the term "predator" to something sexual and get all bent out of shape about it is something THEY will have to figure out. Its not my problem.
Actually, they base their case on one article I wrote a long time ago and pulled off the Internet to keep them from suing me (sacrificing my right to free speech to save myself the hassle of the lawsuits) and they sued me anyway. What they do is pull OUT OF CONTEXT - part of a story I wrote about the day I was erroneously told that Jim D'Angelo committed suicide. Of course, unfortunately, it turned out to be someone else who worked at Nexus and not the King of the World himself. If you take what I said out of context, it doesn't sound pretty. But in the context of the story, there is no way anyone with half a brain could ever think that I was serious when I said we think Jim D'Angelo is kinky. The whole business is quite silly. What do I care if he's kinky or not? I just want the bastard out of my life. All of this has been about keeping THEM away. Obviously, it hasn't worked. Anyway, the story was a true account of the day, but oddly enough, it was Poncho who said most of the stuff I'm getting sued for. I wonder why they sued me and not Poncho? hmmm. Or my 85 year old mother who thinks that D'Angelo is the Devil himself. She calls him "evil." So sue her. Sue us all. Sue the whole fucking town, because, quite frankly, although they are greedy for your money, I haven't heard a single good comment about you, Poopsie. Not here in Nexusville.
ANYWAY, their slant on the case seems to have shifted. Now they seem to be complaining that although I may be innocent of any defamation, its still MY FAULT for filing the anti-SLAPP motion which automatically denied them Discovery. Huh? Well! The fools! All they have to do is read my blog and my newspaper to discover whatever they need to discover. And if they didn't realize that they didn't have a case BEFORE they sued me, well.... what can I say? (perhaps a new lawyer???)
My case is a textbook anti-SLAPP action. They have used the justice system to hurt me, to silence me, and to stop me from seeking favorable governmental action. It seems extremely personal. And if you think that by calling somebody "Poopsie" on the Internet caused (oh boo-whoo) damages, wait 'til you hear the total damages these lawsuits have caused ME. And apparently we are just in the beginning stages. There's the appeal, the jury trial (MY trial!), and their appeals after the game's over. They lose. I'm sure this will go on for years and years. Good thing for me that I'm chronically ill and can't do much of anything anyway. So what if I never write music again. I might be on Court TV!!!! I guess they call it True TV now. Perfect!
"But Hannabelle!" you say. "What about the Goose and the Gander? What is this title about?"
It's like the old saying: What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Well, I have sat through two court hearings where the plaintiffs' lawyer is bashing me to the judge! I've been called names. I've been severely criticized. For example, I've been called "caustic". Yet, I am being sued for calling someone "heartless".
Caustic/heartless..... heartless/caustic..... hmmm.
Their attorney said in court: I think she just sits at her computer and makes it all up because she thinks its funny!
So it is alright for that lawyer to express his opinion of me, call me names, and tell lies which malign MY character. That's o.k.?
But I get in trouble for telling the truth.
So I look at it like this. I should be able to sue that lawyer for saying bad stuff about me. Right? And since he represents Nexus and Free-angelo, I should be able to sue them too. Right?
What's good for the gander is also good for the goose.