Talking to Regulars and Readers - Feb. 4, 2007

Readers’ Caution: The false accuser is named at this blog.

John
_________________________________________________
(This is a post in the “old” web log tradition: notes and “thinking out loud” at the end of the day for those in the know with few, if any, links.)

As always, thank you. I read every comment.

I appreciate the comments affirming what I do. They help keep me going.

I also appreciate comments pointing out my errors.

Tomorrow I’ll post on a nice correction the folks at Liestoppers sent me, and my response to them. I think you’ll like it.

Be sure to read those threads. There’s a lot of good information and commentary there. Also, some sharp wit.

There are a couple of threads where I was able to make at least brief responses to most or all your comments. I wish I could do that in every case.

Where I don’t respond individually, I often nevertheless make active use of what you say.

For example, a recent reader noted the NC State Bar opened an ethics file on Nifong on Mar. 30. That put the date in the front of my brain so that when I was posting a response to The Chronicle’s “Just send $$$ alums” editorial, I cited that date when noting to the editors how long President Brodhead had been silent in the face of Nifong’s travesties.

A while back someone mentioned that on May 18 when the racists in the courtroom shouted “Dead man walking!” at Reade Seligmann, a deputy or bailiff went to the man who’d made the death threat, at which point someone who was with the man said he could vouch for him and the court officer left Seligmann’s threatener in the care of the other man.

The JinC reader wondered whether the death threatener would have been left in the other man’s “care,” if the threatener had been a KKK member.

I haven’t forgotten that comment. If I can find the news source where the incident account mentions the reported action of the deputy/bailiff, I plan to use it in a post urging condemnation of the racists and support for Seligmann and his family.

Many of you ask about lawsuits. It sure is a complex area. And I’m not an attorney. So I must be doubly careful what I say.

But starting tomorrow I’ll begin posting more often regarding suits.

Also, I plan to return to those “Wanted” and “Vigilante” posters I first reported on last May.

At lot has happened since.

One of the most important Hoax stories has to do with the Raleigh N&O’s cover-up of what Mangum actually told them including, the N&O has admitted, that fact that she ID’ed Kim Roberts in its now discredited Mar. 25 “anonymous interview” story and made charges about Robert that we’re now told the N&O considered would be libelous for it to publish.

I’ll be back with a talking post tomorrow.

John