http://columbus1.ath.cx/index.php?news=5785
Bob wrote on columbuzz:
"I appreciate it Phil. We try to delete all that stuff. We delete quite a bit but most of that is idiots calling me names and saying outrageous nonsense."
Bob is lying again! I have offered numerous times to provide Bob a list of libelous statements made against Fred Barkes on columbuzz.
"It's no my website. I am very involved but it belongs to other people."
My translation: If columbuzz is ever sued for libel, I'm going to claim that it's not my website and throw Jeremy under the bus.
"Asking questions is not libelous. Voicing opinions of elected officials and staff is not libelous. Stating facts without proof is not libelous. That proof might need to be shown in court, but it isn'tlibelous until it is stated as true and proven to be untrue."
How does Bob know they are facts without proof? You know what is libelous Bob? Claiming someone is a criminal without proof.
"And if you notice, I always say that I was told something. THAT part is true. Whether what they told me is true or not is a different matter."
Which proves that Bob is not at all interested in the truth, in my opinion.
Phil Swaim countered with:
"Stating facts without proof is most of the time libel. Sure, you can show the evidence in court, but why not now? It also hurts credibility."
Bob responds:
"Like I said, read what I write and you will see what I mean."
My translation: I'm Bob Freeman! I don't need proof!
Bob again:
"But I won't change how I do things because I have always stated facts as facts and suspicions as suspicions."
Another untrue statement from Bob.
"Unless I say otherwise, I mean each and every word I say. If he is doing something he shouldn't do, he better be sure I don't find out about it."
You mean something like odometer fraud?
29 comments:
I can hear Jim Morrison..."this is the end...beautiful friend...."
It's been fun Bob. It's been maddening. I would suggest you start making up with people as fast as you can. You are going to need all the friends you can find.
We will all soon see just how Bob's "proof" holds up in a court of law. I expect this will be filed in Bartholomew County but will no doubt be moved. It's exciting!!!!
HERE WE GO AGAIN...
Bob Freeman on 24 February, 2011 12:46:29
Like I said, read what I write and you will see what I mean.
NO ONE SEES WHAT YOU MEAN. YOU OFFER STATEMENTS AS FACT WITH NOTHING TO BACK THEM UP.
Voicing opinion about the staff of an elected official,who in the end, works for us, is my right. And when we have scores of people telling us that they refuse to go there to get the help they need because of the mistreatment they receive from that staff, it is my right, and my obligation, to get the word out on it.
NO BOB, IT IS NOT. IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO OFFER PROOF AND PROVIDE YOUR COMPLAINTS TO LAW ENFORCEMENT OR THE BOARD OF GOVERNMENT THAT OVERSEES THE TRUSTEE'S OFFICE. YOU HAVE NO PROOF OF ANYTHING. YOU OFFER NOTHING BUT YOUR INSANE OPINIONS AND CONJECTURE...NOTHING HAS BEEN PROVEN...EVER!
As public servants who work for the voters of the township, that staff doesn't have the right to do the things we have heard they do repeatedly.
PROVE IT BOB. P-R-O-V-E I-T! YOU CAN'T!
That isn't their option. When we have staff members that apologize to clients because the trustee tells them to ask questions that the state says they can't legally ask, we have a problem that people need to know about.
MORE NONSENSE FROM MEALY-MOUTHED BOB.
Like the funeral showing deal. We have three eye witnesses to what transpired. And they will testify if they need to.
TESTIFY FOR WHAT BOB. STATEMENTS PERHAPS MADE IN POOR TASTE. REALLY? TESTIFY AS TO WHAT??? EXACTLY WHAT LAW WAS BROKEN???
If they want to air this in a court of law, let's air it all. Let's allow the people of the township to see just what sort of crap goes on in that office.
I AGREE. MAYBE THE JUDGE CAN SILENCE BOB FREEMAN.
That iis what I have been trying to do for the past year or so. So the decision is theirs. I simply don't care. I feeI have covered my ass.
YOU REALLY SHOULD STOP LISTENING TO PHIL SWAIM AND OTHERS. IT'S TIME TO SHUT YOUR MOUTH BOB AND LAWYER UP!
I take the threat seriously.
NO, YOU DON'T!
But I won't change how I do things because I have always stated facts as facts and suspicions as suspicions.
YOU ARE DELUSIONAL.
I will simply be a bit clearer now on which is which. I will post as if I am posting for an attorney to see, because they most likely are watching.
YOU SHOULD POST AS A JUDGE AND JURY WILL SEE IT BOB BECAUSE THEY WILL.
They should take me seriously as well.
IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THESE PEOPLE ARE THROUGH FOOLING WITH YOU.
Unless I say otherwise, I mean each and every word I say. If he is doing something he shouldn't do, he better be sure I don't find out about it.
NOTHING LIKE CLOSING WITH A THREAT BOB. KEEP IT UP AND THIS COULD GO CRIMINAL.
I don't think Bob understands what he is getting into. If I were him, I would hire someone to read all my stuff and remove the libel and read all future authored articles to make sure libel and slander are not present.
Some of Bob's info is right and he makes good points, but when one starts talking about instances in funeral homes and the office building of this official, we need more than just hearsay, which is what he has to offer.
I hope Bob wakes up to reality soon. It would be a shame to see such good energy and talent to go to waste because it was used to libel rather than report and give fact backed opinion.
if he were to hire someone to read all his things before he posts them to remove the libel it would read something like this:
I... ..... ...... ..... think.... ... .. ... and.... . . with....... .......pothole..... .. ... wrong...... better.....
Mr.Freeman is very fortunate as most people possessing mentality and belligerency, such as his, are either institutionalized or incarcerated.
So, if someone tells Bob that the mayor has mishandled funds, according to him he should report that he was told that. If someone tells him that the moon is blood red, he should do the same. It doesn't matter what is true or not. He has an obligation to tell everyone that he had been told such things. Whether or not the things he was told was accurate or whether or not the sources are dependable is immaterial.
"I don't think Bob understands what he is getting into."
Bob doesn't have a clue what he's getting into.
"It would be a shame to see such good energy and talent to go to waste because it was used to libel rather than report and give fact backed opinion. "
On this we disagree. I see no talent in Bob.
"Stating facts without proof is not libelous" -Bob
Reread the law Bob. First, they are not "facts" if they are not true.
Second, if you state them as "facts" and there is no proof, they are per se untrue.
Third, if they are untrue and you can not provide your so-called sources (it better not be someone's cousin down the street who wrote you an email)and if you reported it without due dilligence (remember you are representing yourself as media)then you reported with disregard to its truth. (remember your statement about having the right to report something that's not true? oops)
If you reported this with malice. Then it is libel.
Most journalists/newspapers win libel suits based on the third rung. Malice is hard to prove. It is hard to read people's minds. However........
You are not so smart. Let's see if I can find malice just off the top of my head. I wonder if a judge or jury would consider the following comments as malicious or not:
* Calling someone a whore (most journalists do not make that mistake in print)
* Calling someone a cunt (see above)
* Claiming someone should have their ass kicked (see above).
* Promising you will find out every dirty secret about people you don't like and threatening to expose them.
There are many others and you know it. Those are not statements reporting an issue. Those are malicious comments about people you write about. I am confident any sane person would agree.
"good energy and talent"?
Are you kidding me?
Phil is as blind as Freeman and the BobOBots.
p.s.
I am not saying the above statements are libel. They are statements establishing your malicious intent.
Calling someone a crook, with no proof, with disregard to the truth and with malice, that's libel. There are so many other libelous statements to choose from too.
"You are not so smart. Let's see if I can find malice just off the top of my head. I wonder if a judge or jury would consider the following comments as malicious or not:"
Proving malice with Bob would be a slam dunk.
Libel Standards in Indiana
If I were Bob, I would issue a retraction immediately.
And Bob, your usual "I believed it was true" is not a retraction.
Phil Swaim is another trouble-making big mouth. He is to the tea-baggers what Freeman is to the Dems...
Bob offers no journalistic talent or any real credentials to the discussion. He is a disgruntled politician...in reality...is is not even a politician, per se, he has been beaten 5 times. He is just a disgruntled citizen who offers NO PROOF of his insane allegations and simply offers up conjecture as fact.
Phil Swaim said...
It would be a shame to see such good energy and talent to go to waste because it was used to libel rather than report and give fact backed opinion.
AND THAT, FRIENDS, SAYS IT ALL ABOUT PHIL SWAIM!
I am guessing that Jeremy or the actual owners of the "Columbus Private Server" (Which is godaddy, hardly private) were served with the same letter Bob received and instead in launching into a tantrum like Bob did are taking it seriously by revoking Bob's content and hopefully his editorial privileges. I am guessing Jeremy does not want to be in court defending Bob.
" I am guessing Jeremy does not want to be in court defending Bob."
He's going to be. Has Bob ever shown himself to be a stand-up person? He is going to try and say the comments posted by him on Columbuzz weren't him.
Jeremy is a young man. This is a good lesson for him to learn. As for Freeman, it's past time his pie hole was shut down. The non-sense that he has subjected this community too has gone on for too long.
Phil you are way out there when it comes to Bob. I read in another post yesterday where appeasing Bob is akin to appeasing Hitler and we saw what happened with that.
Bob HAS NO PLACE in public dialog. He doesn't. Bob is not capable of proving ANYTHING he says beyond his own insanity. Your inability to see this raises serious doubts about your credibility Phil but after talking to some others in the community, you and Bob are cut from the same mold.
Bob really believes that "I'm sorry.(but not really)", and "I made a mistake", are legal phrases that equate to an acquittal.
He thinks if he is ever caught, called on, or backed into a corner over something he did, or said, that these excuses let him off the hook legally and otherwise.
Bob's brain should be removed (tweezers would work) and studied.
It is truly a wonderous microscopic oddity of nature.
Wow, anonymous. YOu seem to have pretty deep opinions about someone you do not even know.
Bob has talents. He just uses them incorrectly. it's going to get him in trouble too. Once again, Godwin's Law has been proven here again, Mr. Anonymous.
Bob is hot headed speak before he thinks and knows kind of guy. If he would re-order that process to know, think and then speak, he would not post half the stuff he posted in the election. Unfortunately, I don't think Bob is able to censor himself, though he seems to like censoring other people quite a bit. That's a big problem if he is trying to pass himself off as credible.
It is indeed a shame to see people who have a good ability to reach people through a media use that media to defame others and just post whatever comes to his mind regardless of fact.
I'm also sorry that Mr. Anonymous hates someone with so much passion and so much vitriol that he cannot have a balanced look at something.
Do you want me to start calling bob names before you stop thinking I'm a Bob-o-bot as you guys call them? It's not going to happen. Again, I shouldn't need to call people names to let the truth of their actions come to light.
Dude is doing a good job bringing out some of this. The most recent being the report to the REpublic and what Bob posted about it.
What I do not understand is why Mr. Anonymous thinks I am from the same mold as speak before he thinks Bob Freeman. I actually do work. I actually look at things before I post something. If I don't have enough proof or evidence, I don't post because it is not worth it.
"Bob offers no journalistic talent or any real credentials to the discussion. He is a disgruntled politician...in reality...is is not even a politician, per se, he has been beaten 5 times. He is just a disgruntled citizen who offers NO PROOF of his insane allegations and simply offers up conjecture as fact."
I would say that is a fair analysis of Bob Freeman's "work" on Columbuzz, to a 95% large degree.
From Phil:
"Wow, anonymous. YOu seem to have pretty deep opinions about someone you do not even know."
I DO know Bob Freeman.
I know him very well.
I cannot say how I know him, but I do know Bob on a personal level.
As far as deep opinions, Phil....you have many as well....about people that I can only assume you do not know.
I was not talking about Bob, Mr. anonymous. I was talking about me. You have very deep opinions about someone you do not know, that person being me.
I know you have deep opinions about Bob and that's fine. I see you guys have had plenty of time to get to know him by his actions.
I do have deep opinions. Isn't it great we live in a country where we can be free to have those and even share them?
I was not talking about Bob, Mr. anonymous. I was talking about me. You have very deep opinions about someone you do not know, that person being me.
Perception is reality Phil. You giving credence to anything that comes from Bob Freeman's hole automatically calls into question everything you have to say.
Mr. Anonymous, that is the very definition of a logical fallacy. Just because someone approves of a few things, does not mean he approves of the whole package. I believe I have stated on here plenty of times that I do not approve of Bob's ethics or his style of "reporting."
"perception is reality" is a horrible way to live because one will get it wrong 9 times out of 10, as you have with me, because it totally removes actual fact from decision making and just relies on surface deep observation.
I think you will be pleased, anyway, with an announcement on this blog I am about to make.
Perception is REALITY Phil it's not a lifestyle choice. It's a fact.
The suggestion that Bob review his homeowners policy is priceless and true. This is better than what is on TV!
Post a Comment