John articulates his views in a concise and clear cut manner, as one would expect from a lawyer. He takes it in two sections, law and facts. He believes that any case brought against me would not win. He concludes:
Bottom line: Gavin’s statements appear to be true. Usually one bullet is sufficient to kill the fish in the barrel, and that should do it. If Gavin wants to fire a few more, he could point out that even if it’s false, I didn’t know that it was (in fact, there is a lot of stuff online that appears to confirm Gavin’s statements); even if I knew it was false, you could never prove I knew that; even if you could prove I more likely than not knew it, you can’t prove clearly and convincingly that I knew it was false . . . .
What about malice? The only malice I see on Gavin’s site is from Gray’s attorneyŚmaybe he should look up “malicious prosecution.”
I would like to thank John for his summing up of the situation. It is a great read for any bloggers that might find themselves in this situation in the future.