Bill Schmalfeldt has been advised by his attorney to NOT comment on a lawsuit. This must feel a bit like being told not to itch that scratch… You know, the one right there between the shoulder blades.
Bill Schmalfeldt’s latest:
I just deleted a 1,000-word post in which I refuted some remarkably stupid allegations made by a person I am suing in Federal Court.
While proofing the post I had to ask myself, “What’s the point I’m trying to make here? If this incredibly stupid person being sued for making incredibly stupid and defamatory remarks wishes to dig in deeper by accusing me of faking my Parkinson’s disease, thereby throwing gasoline on an already raging fire, why would I interfere?”
If this person wishes to ignore even the most basic advice any lawyer would give to someone being sued, that being “don’t give the Plaintiff any more ammunition to use against you,” why in the world would I refuse to accept delivery of the pallets of ordnance being delivered free of cost?
If someone is that dim, that bereft of common sense, that deluded about the nature of the allegations in my complaint that he or she would voluntarily hand the metaphorical baseball bat wrapped in metaphorical barbed wire to my attorney to be used to bash his or her metaphorical head until it is a pulpy mass of metaphorical bone and brain tissue, who am I to tell this person that he or she overdid it with the barbed wire?
I took nearly the entire post, as Bill Schmalfeldt cares very much about context. If I quote just a tiny bit, we might miss the nuancy contextual
threat thread of the post. If Bill figures I have violated his copyright on the post, I’ll consider editing. Frankly, it’s worth the potential legal trouble to simply document in complete detail what just got published. The art was in his original post.
What is he talking about in the post? Here’s the funny thing:
Sarah Palmer at BillySez has apparently NOT been advised to stop writing about Bill. She quotes his online material, including the stuff he spoliated.
Spoliation is the destruction of evidence. Bill Schmalfeldt has destroyed much of his online writing over the past few years — to the point that he probably doesn’t know what he really has said.
Sarah does. And as she publishes and comments on the psychology and pathology of Bill Schmalfeldt, he stews in his own juices. Just like our little fellow on the right.
And so, he publishes a post with violent imagery, in response to someone he is suing, who has already convinced a judge that he is a threat to her, after his lawyer has advised him to avoid commenting at all about the case.
When will Bill Schmalfeldt’s original post be spoliated, and the heartfelt but inappropriate venom hidden from view? I’m not a betting guy, but probably it will disappear sometime around the time Bill’s attorney reads his morning email on Tuesday.