Re: hi.. hope all is well

Hello there, i am sorry to hear that= Lawrence. Sorry if my reply is a bit late as i have been out of internet =ange as i am in Tonga.

That is terrible that ASU sent t=e report to Mel Thomson and horrible that she distributed it. Don'= these people have any serious battles to fight? There are so many huge pr=blems in the world and they are attacking a great person for what? Trivia.=lt is trivial.

Vis a vis defamation, be a b=t wary and have a think about the action is the tight course of action for=you, and consult your misses who is extremely wise, also.

On the one hand if you can prove this woman lied, you may win a de=amation case

against her.

On the other hand, if y=u start that fight it could drag on for 2 or 3 years and thus keep appeari=g in the news. Worse she could make extravagant claims and make demands in=the Discovery process which would then get wide and repeated coverage.

Sometimes defamation cases can make everything worse,=especially if she is able to make it appear as though you are persecuting =er, and she is weak and defenceless crusading for principles and you are s=rong and powerful.

That would make it all worse.<=div>

On the other hand if you can prove she is a malici=us actor who really had it in for you and can successfully win the PR war =s well as the legal battle then it may be worth it.

Ideally you would join the publications that printed her claims to the s=it. They should be your primary target as it is their job not to destroy l=ves with unsubstantiated claims. That also deters other publishers from ha=ing a go at you if they see you are likely to litigate and to win.

ASU determining against you complicates matters as people=can print what they have determined in their report. However they are not = court. Are you able to take legal action against ASU in a court?

You need to appeal that decision and preferably take legal=action against ASU. I am not sure how or under what legislation that could=fall. But i think that universities must be bound by some sort of laws not=to unfairly dismiss or find against staff because their internal processes=are not courts. If laws are broken we have courts to deal with them. This =s extra-judicial. So if they violate your own rights with their non-court =etermination i would think there should be some form of legal redress, but=you would need a US lawyer for that one.

I think =ou need to attack this issue at the root

I would =ay nothing publicly until you have all your ducks in a row.

=/div>

I would first appeal the ASU verdict and hit that with everythin=. That uncomplicates everything and allows you a free swing at everything =Ise.

Because these things take time, i would ask =he good defamation lawyer in Australia (just pay the money and get the bes= advice) about whether you can file against the publishing houses that pub=ished the false claims by wand then just add her on to the suit (but do=t make it about her)

With the point about it bein= someone you had met before and not a stranger in the selfie, i would not =ely on this point as it is not really relevant to the case and she can jus= say "i was mistaken it wasnt a malicious lie" and then sh= is off the hook on that point. Just stick to the actual best points, numb=r 5 sounds promising.

I think you really need to =ake an appointment with the lawyer that briefs Stuart

Littlemore.

Also weigh up the risk that if you sue, it will be news an= that means others may be emboldened to come forward with claims of their =wn.

But ask Stuart Littlemore's briefing =awyer about your best course of legal action and what the pros and cons ar=.

It is complicated and there are lots of parts t= weigh up. I am so sorry this is an awful thing to happen to a lovely pers=n who is great fun and really kind hearted.

Make =n appoint,ent, dont delay, talk to the good lawyer

And really good luck i am on your side.

who is she??

here are the arguments against and for a suit, sent a few weeks ago =y Alison with experience, from OZ..

he is a journalist in Australia who was also on our Amazon cruise.. she wa= involved in a defamation suit in OZ, and if my memory is correct, she eit=er launched the suit, or a countersuit, and fought it through to the end a=d won some money. She is also a strong supporter and has become a f=iend of ours.

lets see justins billi on tues. then you will =eed prep for conciliation. and discipline.!!!! =A0 1. you should ask questions =C2 not give answers. ex. how do you=come to the conclusion that ASU has jurisdiciton.? can you define f=r me sexual harrassment. can you point to t=e regs. the drawing.? silly, =C2 has any student complained prior to buzz feed articel. h=s any faculty .... has any ... =C2 ask questions . as much as you can. =A0 why did they choose to believe.. as you =now the title 9 rules are being modified. I assume we will ope=ate under the proposed regs. as you are on notice. of the changes. ??=A0 if they say no, you might suggest , waiting until the= are finalized as after a hearing you will fly a court action. that =ill by definition. have the new rules in place by that time. =C2 You would like to work out a solution. =you woudl like to work out a solution. . over and over. =C2 \ you need to appear reasonable. if yo= argue, you were awkward. . accidnet after accindent ski=t breast comments it appears weak.. you CANNOT attack the peo=el that complained you need to attack their testimony. =C2 I dont want to attack the women, I would like you to make you= own decision based on the facts. . etc. . the fac=s the rules and the law.. if you appear misleading=A0, one time its over. !! you w=re not believeed the first time. you were too defensiive.=A0. you made statmeents that were silly, ie no p=oblem with case as i was invited back ?!! . =ant say that again. lucy hawkins was the daughter of my friend= I will happily have a face to face with the supervisor that f=led the report. she never filed it when she heard it.=A0 is that a failure to report issue. lucy w=nts no part of this. . to suggest she told someone that never =iid anyting, but when asked recallled a story she onve heard. ?=A0 does that seem fair. quesion quesi=on. . dont say ITS NOT FAIR !! I understand =he concern. I understand how some things can be misinterpreted but I=ask you if and if so how does these events fit into the rules . law.=and regs. can you explain it to me.