@PaulPhillipsEsq @pushingrope @JohnPContiTPA I want your document, with typos #yougetwhatyoupayfor
— Javier Manjarres (@THESHARKTANK1) December 3, 2013Based on an emaeil I received, I thought a few things should be made clear. Pinson’s bar complaint against me was dismissed with no probable cause and remains, therefore, confidential within the bar system. Providing the contents to any person outside the system opens those individuals up to lawsuits. Because Mr. Pinson’s com"plaint was filled with untruths and lies, any publishing of such document would be actionable. I can ensure you I will use all avenues available to me should any unsubstantiated accusation of that complaint be used in any form.Now I get this email from Phillips.
If you wanted the bar complaint and my response, just ask. Instead, you take the path all bloggers take and try to make something out of nothing, try to create some appearance of impropriety, and end up defaming an attorney with a clean record. That is just uncool. I have tried to be reasonable here. My address is below. Call before you come and I can have copies made for you. You just have to post my response, and make it very clear that the complaint was dismissed for no probable cause because the accusations had not merit. That is the issue with defamation. Not spelling errors (which came from your bad copy paste and not from my email). By posting one side of a complaint - that was dismissed without merit - and not clearly stating that it was dismissed, is irresponsible and the courts will find on my side (I have case law that shows it pretty clear). As a blogger who asserts that he is media, I can give you some free legal advice here. If you know the whole story, or have been given credible evidence contradicting a source, then you have to show both sides. Otherwise, you are open to lawsuits. What most people don’t realize is that lawsuits last a very long time, a year or more, and are very expensive, and any lawyer will want to get paid along the way for their work. I see bills all day long and they are 5 figures. Again, I have been very reasonable, but your responses to my emails and posts about them have been irresponsible. Either you are not reading these emails in their entirety, or you are purposely taking things out of context to draw readership or something. I don’t know.I seem to remember reading that part about Phillips threatening to sue me if I published any part of the Florida Bar complaint. Perhaps Phillips has a different definition of "reasonable" than I do. I think I am going to pass on that offer of legal advice. Phillips has threatened to sue for for libel. One of the reasons is pointing out the typos in his email.
Additionally, besides being sent with a disclaimer explaining that the November 22, 2013 email was to remain confidential, you posted an incorrect version of the November 22, 2013 email. The email sent to you does not contain the errors shown in your post. Instead, your post states:The email with typos is posted above and here. Is Phillips serious? I still have the email. This will be laughed out of court. What I am investigating is the WTSP story about the Michael Pinson Foundation and the accusations that Peter Schorsch pressured political official into paying for positive coverage on SaintPetersblog. Phillips was Schorsch's attorney for these contracts. Phillips told me in an email that no longer represents Schorsch. The Tampa Bay Times broke the story. Pinson was one of the people that told TBT about the contract he never signed. Phillips drew up the contract. What kind of guy is Phillips. Phillips fire off this tweet at Javier Manjarres' Hispanic heritage.
you need to go back to mowing lawns buddy. Rhetoric not your thing. Partial truths, red herrings, ad hominems. Wow.
@THESHARKTANK1 you need to go back to mowing lawns buddy. Rhetoric not your thing. Partial truths, red herrings, ad hominems. Wow.
— Paul Phillips (@PaulPhillipsEsq) December 3, 2013
No comments:
Post a Comment