Chess Forum / General Topics / May 2009

I seem to remember her that some attorney, apparently, celebrated the
same instance, and when challenged refused to say if

a) he knew the case had been investigated then dismissed after due
diligence and investigation by a court, and
b) his own role in in this, which he seemed to admit at the time as
having contacted the accuser

Therefore what is reported here is of a case, investigated by a court,
pro forma within a divorce, yet de riguer as to the nature of the
charge  - yet all dismissed AFTER investigation

What the poster 'Vidmar' should mean by posting this information again
is what?

There is something to the allegation or there is something
discreditable about the USCF's attorney raising the issue?

We don't know since such as 'Vidmar' are not concerned with that as
much as with varieties of speculation.

Now, while the cowardly poster Vidmar, girl of many masks and
remailers, will never come clear, if the character of Vidmar actually
indicted in the above?

You see, if you did opine upon a dismissed case, without indicating it
was dismissed, would that not be character denigration? That is to
say, plain libel?

No wonder Vidmar is a remailer ID since otherwise Vidmar could be
called to account for her own actions and those who got off on them,
no?

Phil Innes