I think Siegelman was railroaded
We know some details because Jill Simpson blew the whistle
Back in the Bush era, I did look at legalschnauzer now and then regarding the case -- but the main use, that I could make of the blog, was as an aid for tracking down credible reports about the case: Shuler himself wasn't really doing any original journalistic work on the subject, and his summaries of what was known were often rather garbled
To win our fights, we need accurate facts and careful analysis based on those facts. A certain healthy paranoia can guide our research into details, by suggesting where to look and what to seek, but it cannot substitute for the actual facts
Shuler's attitudes towards the courts resemble the notions of so-called "sovereign citizens" -- he doesn't think the courts are legitimate and so feels unobligated to take their orders and judgments seriously. When he loses a case and is found to owe his neighbor $1500, he just ignores it, and when his neighbor gets the judgment enforced, Shuler ignores that too, so his house is sold from under him, to collect the judgement: it's nuts. When he's sued for defamation after claiming someone had an extramarital affair, he doesn't bother to appear to defend himself, and when he's served with a court order to take down those posts, he throws the papers out his car window and ignores the order, so he pointlessly spends five months in jail for contempt: again, it's nuts . He may have had some arguments in those matters, but he loses by default, since he simply refuses to recognize ordinary legal process
If you treat attitudes towards Shuler as a surrogate for attitudes towards Siegelman, you simply hitch your wagon to a very strange duck without gaining anything in result
= new reply since forum marked as read
