| > You're saying there's no basis for these claims I'm saying that there is no basis that has been cited for the specific characterizations made in the comment I first responded to upthread, correct. > The basis is the legal complaint, which is publicly accessible. Your post in which you made the characterization quoted text from the news article, not the complaint. If you actually have read the complaint and were characterizing the material in it after reading it in context, that was a very poor presentation. > While I know that the news media will give it their own biased slant, certain things, like her saying that she has the license plate numbers of those visiting his house, or that he has BDSM gear, I believe I can take as objectively factual. Perhaps, but the characterization of their relevance to the legal causes of action at the center of the case would require knowing, for instance, the details of the alleged manner of intentional infliction of emotional distress and whether or not the arsenal of BDSM equipment was integral to that. Which you could not get from the news article at the head of the thread; you could, presumably, from the complaint, but I see no evidence that you have seen it. |