http://columbus1.ath.cx/index.php?news=5829
"Fred and Sandra Barkes, along with Rodney and Briana Ferrenburg have filed suit against me."
And the crowd goes wild! Woo hoo!
"Now the truth can and will come out."
Yes Bob, the real truth, not your "truth".
"I need those of you that have evidence and are willing to testify, or know of witnesses that we should subpeona to testify, please get the information to me."
Bob, you can't be serious. You don't already have the evidence ready to go?
"I have a feeling this will be quite a court battle and I want to be prepared. They will have to try to prove that what I said was false and I will have to show them why they are wrong to think that."
It should be pretty easy to prove what you said was false.
"Anyway, send it to my address, 3225 Lilac Ct. Columbus, Indiana 47203 or my e-mail, robertfreeman@yahoo.com. Please remember, some of you have remained anonymous, so I can't contact you."
In other words, I have no idea who my sources are so I have no idea if they are even credible. Way to go, Bob.
"And I know some won't wish to testify, but they won't perjure themselves if forced to testify."
I'll bet very few, if any, will be willing to testify under oath.
"This is all part of the battle to bring the truth out. This is all a part of people wanting to suppress that truth. We must endure this."
No Bob, YOU must endure this. I have a feeling you're going to be fighting this battle alone.
"In fact, this will help get the facts out. Files will be requested with the evidence we need. The entire township will see just what we have been saying and they will know what I have posted is true. My attorney will know what to look for."
You don't already have the files? Then how can you be so sure that the files will provide the evidence that you need? In my opinion, Bob, you're toast. Good luck. You'll need it.
26 comments:
Rude, obnoxious, big-mouthed, conceited, vulgar, perverted, law-breaking, self-righteous Bob now wants others to help him out of the corner he backed himself into.
I was so hoping that he would attempt to defend himself without the help of a professional attorney.
If Bob speaks in court, it will all be over.
If he remains completely silent in court (the most intelligent thing for him to do), he will never live down the fact that he "had his day in court", and clammed up tighter than what his sphincter must be experiencing at this very moment.
I agree with Dude.
Bob will be searching for all of his numerous supporters, but find himself completely alone in the courtroom.
And can you believe he posts such documents against him so freely and swiftly on the Internet for all to see...as if he is proud?
He has the mind of a third-grader.
Bob Freeman on the Stand
Headline from The Republic:
"Concrete Technologist Cements His Own Fate"
I wonder if the trial will be open to the public. ;)
Quote from Freeman the Fanatic:
"I need those of you that have evidence and are willing to testify, or know of witnesses that WE should subpeona to testify, please get the information to me."
"We"????????
I saw only one person listed as the Defendant.
It's a good thing he kept his house on Pearl Street.
Looks like he's about o lose his current home on Lilac.
HEY!
NOW we know why Bob wanted a homeless shelter so badly....he knew he may need it someday!
"I wonder if the trial will be open to the public. ;)"
They should put it on Court TV.
I'll be the guy with the popcorn in the back row.
Bob can call to testify all those people who phoned in to "The Bob Show". Oh wait, nevermind. After the trial people will know who the real cunt is.
Bob Freeman is no stranger to the Bartholomew County Court system.
Here are some other court cases of Bob Freeman: FREEMAN COURT CASES
There are some interesting parties in some of these cases.
Notice that Bob was the Defendant of a criminal case in '88.
The plaintiff in that case was the State of Indiana, and the judge was Katie Coriden...the very same judge who will be presiding in his upcoming court case.
Get them IP addresses ready Bob they are coming after them.
IC 34-15-4-2 requires a plaintiff to serve notice on a newspaper or news service of the factual statements in the article that are false and defamatory and correct the falsity by pointing out the true facts prior to the filing of a lawsuit. The notice must be given at least four to 11 days depending upon whether the defendant is a news service, daily or weekly newspaper.
Since when is Columbuzz a newspaper or news service?
Anonymous said...
I heard today from a great source that
Barkes’ and the Ferrenburgs wish to further there legal action Robert Freeman
LOOK OUT BOBBY HERE IT COMES YOU BETTER GET READY!!!!!!!!!!
March 4, 2011 1:26 PM
GUESS MY SOURCE WAS RIGHT ON THE MONEY HUH BOB
SEE THATS HOW IT WORKS, WHEN SOMEBODY REALLY HAS THE TRUTH ABOUT SOMETHING.(IN CAPS CAUSE ITS TRUE)
NOW I CAN HEAR HIS WIFE SAY DAMMIT BOBBY NOW WHAT!!!!!!!!!
YES THE COURT IS AN WILL BE OPEN DOOR TO THE PUBLIC.
CANT WAIT.... IM SO EXCITED TO SEE LITTLE BOBBY FREEMAN GET HIS ASS HANDED TO HIM ON A SILVER PLATTER.
LITTLE BOBBY FREEMAN LETS GET READY TO RUMBLE
LMAO@YOU I WILL BE THE IN FRONT ROW FOR THIS
Although the statute does not specifically state whether it covers online publications, the court's decision in Christopher v. American News Co., 171 F.2d 275 (7th Cir. 1948) suggests that Indiana's retraction statute covers an online publisher if the publisher's primary focus is the reporting of factual occurrences.
I believe this disqualifies columbuzz.
You know even though he deserved to be taken to court, I was glad they gave him a chance to correct things at first. But then after getting a little boost from a member there (and possibly thinking it a hoax due to the misspellings) he started in again. At that point I thought he deserved what he got and hoped they continued.
Most journalists will go to jail rather than reveal their sources. It appears that Bob is not one of those. This might work against him for future "stories" as people will be afraid he will out them. At the very least, people will not disclose their identities. This would be problematic the same way it is now for the ones who remained anonymous. He might only have emails from them and I am not sure what luck people will have in finding the owners. I don't even know if they will think it worth the effort.
Yes, Bob might have some materials showing submissions to the site, but a person can email and say anything they want. If he didn't attempt to verify the accuracy of said submissions, I think he is toast. It is one thing to be tipped off and then try to investigate, but quite another to report it as gospel without looking into things further.
I predict that many of the things Bob thinks he has will be proven to be incorrect, sour grapes from others, opinions, ways to lash out at someone who they are mad at etc. and ol' Bob will have egg on his face. I can just see the way they handle reporting it over there. I guess one needs to get the scoop from the Republic.
Will this have jurors? I think I want to volunteer. ;)
Ooh, I am also looking forward to the people who said such things getting put on the stand in court (if they do). Put them under oath and let them tell that they didn't know it, only suspected it, or worse made it up either to gossip or because they were mad at the person. Maybe the claimants can take those people to court too. This case SHOULD cause people to guard their mouths more. Not only will Bob's outing the sources possibly keep people from submitting, Bob might not use anonymous sources anymore and the fear of getting sued themselves might cause people to not do so. Wait a second, that would imply that Bob would actually learn from his mistakes. I don't see that happening. He was given a good chance to back off and start anew and it lasted a day or two. He had even sort of complimented them for giving him that chance, then like a moron he started in again. Some people never learn.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parties involved in case 03D02-9402-SC-00389
Civil Closed
Filed 02/27/1994
FREEMAN, ROBERT CLAIMANT
BURTON, TERRY DEFENDANT
LATAMENE, AHCENE DEFENDANT
CORIDEN, KATHLEEN T Judge
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parties involved in case 03D02-9111-SC-02524
Civil Closed
Filed 11/15/1991
ALLIED COLLECTION SERVICE INC CLAIMANT
FREEMAN, KATHY DEFENDANT
FREEMAN, ROBERT DEFENDANT
THOMASSON, MICHAEL Attorney
CORIDEN, KATHLEEN T Judge
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parties involved in case 03D02-1006-CC-00475
Civil Open
Filed 06/07/2010
CAPITAL ONE BANK PLANTIFF
FREEMAN, ROBERT D DEFENDENT
BURRIS, THOMAS A Attorney
CORIDEN, KATHLEEN T Judge
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parties involved in case 03D02-9706-IF-04059
Citation Closed
Filed 06/16/1997
STATE OF INDIANA PLAINTIFF
FREEMAN, ROBERT D DEFENDANT
INDIANA STATE POLICE Law Enforcement Officer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parties involved in case 03D01-9009-DR-00452
Civil Closed
Filed 09/17/1990
FREEMAN, ROBERT D PETITIONER
FREEMAN, KATHY J RESPONDENT
MONROE, CHRIS D Judge
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parties involved in case 03D02-8802-CM-00287
Criminal Closed
Filed 02/10/1988
STATE OF INDIANA PLAINTIFF
FREEMAN, ROBERT D DEFENDANT
CORIDEN, KATHLEEN T Judge
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parties involved in case 85CD00919
Civil Closed
Filed 09/04/1985
FREEMAN, VIRGINIA A PETITIONER
FREEMAN, ROBERT D RESPONDENT
WELLS JR, CHARLES R Attorney
HEIMANN, STEPHEN R Judge
Bob offered a retraction and then re-offended days later (like 2 days later) when he was goaded into it. Ole Bob is about to get a lesson he will never forget. Get your wallet out big boy. Oh wait, I'll bet Bob isn't reading this anymore...HARD DRIVE DESTROYED!
Somewhere, there's a fat lady getting ready to sing.
They should have a violinist at the courtroom proceedings.
The violinist will play a melancholy sonata every time that Bob or his attorney speaks.
With the possible exception of subpoenaing them, something tells me that Bob will be like Al Bundy with the posse he took to take on the gang that was harassing a former classmate of his. When he turned around they had all left him to face the music on his own.
Re: Al Bundy
The difference is that Al Bundy is someone you can't help but feel sorry for.
Re: Anonymous @ 11:30
True dat.
Bob may be a boob but this lawsuit is bogus. He's entitled to his own opinion as we all are. I hope the Barkes family didn't pay too much for their attorney… it seems he can't even spell. I'm no fan of Bob, but if the Barkes's have grounds for suing Bob, it seems Bob would have grounds for suing "Dude". I'm just sayin'.
"Bob would have grounds for suing "Dude""
How have I libeled Bob?
You can't sue someone if you don't know their identity.
"Bob may be a boob but this lawsuit is bogus. He's entitled to his own opinion as we all are."
When you accuse someone of committing a crime, that is "libel per se" when you claim you are a journalist you are held to a higher standard.
You can sue anyone you know. And the courts can ask for the IP address which will lead to an ISP and they will just ask the ISP for the information of the customer with said IP address. Then that customer gets called in to be a witness or can even get sued for libel.
Proxy Servers also are not immune to the courts. If they have an IP, they can go to the proxy server, ask which client requested a certain web address within a certain time frame. Then they get and IP address. Wash rinse repeat until you get to the ISP and find the customer.
NOTHING IS ANONYMOUS! you may think that you cannot be found, but if someone wants to find you bad enough, they will.
Post a Comment