Alan Colmes

Earlier this week, provocative Alabama law blogger Roger Shuler posted an interesting tidbit about solidly conservative US Court of Appeals 11th Circuit Justice William Pryor.

And, to quote the great George Takei, “Oh, my!” Above the Law, arguably the most popular (and dishy) legal blog in the nation, has picked up the story . . .

Bill Pryor at badpuppy.com

If true, this would not be the first time that a respected jurist has inadvertently revealed what lies underneath their robes. Judge Wade McCree of Michigan bared it all when one of his sext messages was leaked to the public. Madam Justice A. Lori Douglas blushed red as a Canadian maple leaf when nude photographs of Her Honor engaging in bondage acts surfaced online.

On the other hand, if the gossip that is making the rounds is true, it would likely be the first time that a federal judge seated on one of the United States circuit courts has been caught with his pants around his ankles — or in this case, with no pants at all . . . 

The judge implicated in this affair is William Holcombe Pryor Jr. of the Eleventh Circuit, who also serves on the U.S. Sentencing Commission. Though we have no way to confirm if the accusations are true, we can’t help but notice a possible resemblance between Judge Pryor and the attractive young man in the pictures (meaning that Judge Pryor is quite the judicial superhottie).

Bill Pryor, in a "family friendly" version of his badpuppy.com photo.

"Over the last week, I have been smeared by a widely discredited blogger with a political agenda. His allegations have now been picked up by other bloggers. The person in the unsourced, undated photographs is not me, and I deny these allegations. I have been twice vetted by the FBI, including as recently as this past year; I have won two contested statewide elections; and I have been in the public eye for almost twenty years. I will not dignify these disgraceful accusations with any further comment."

Jennifer Bandy

Andrew:

Just a thought on Pryor's statement about me being a "widely discredited blogger." It didn't occur to me last night, but I feel certain that is a reference to the apparent lawsuit that Alabama lawyer Bill Baxley has filed against me . . . over my reporting on the extramarital affair involving Attorney General Luther Strange and his former campaign manager Jessica Medeiros Garrison. I say "apparent lawsuit" because I haven't been served with it and haven't seen it, but I hear it's out there.

The point, though, is that it seems Pryor now has joined an unsavory alliance that has formed in an effort to attack me for reporting accurately about judicial/legal sleaze in Alabama and beyond. This alliance includes a judge who engaged in gay porn (Pryor); a former politician who is a notorious drunk and was caught having an affair with an AP reporter and is known for all sorts of colorful deeds in Las Vegas (Baxley); plus two people who have engaged in financial, professional, and extramarital hanky panky (Strange and Garrison).

As you report on this, you might want to keep in mind that Jessica Garrison used to work for Pryor (and his No. 1 supporter, Jeff Sessions), and she has called Pryor her mentor. . . . When Garrison couldn't take a job with Big Luther in AG's office because of her divorce/custody case, she landed at the Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA), which Pryor started. How does Garrison live in Birmingham and work at D.C.-based RAGA? (BTW, property records show Garrison bought a $440,000 house in Mountain Brook, Alabama's most prestigious suburb, for $30,000. How did she pull that off? I will be reporting on that soon.)

I know the apparent lawsuit isn't about my coverage of the Strange/Garrison affair, because all parties involved know that is true. But I've been working on 2-3 stories that the lawsuit is designed to shut down. One involves Jessica Garrison's funky real estate deal. Another involves her business ties to a guy name Erik Davis Harp, who was indicted in an offshore illegal gambling ring (Panama) that has ties to Gambino and Genovese crime families. Another involves a major Alabama judicial figure who has issues similar to those involving Pryor.

An edited version of Bill Pryor, from badpuppy.com

A gay pornography scandal involving U.S. Circuit Judge Bill Pryor likely is a byproduct of an Alabama political system that tends to reward candidates who tout "family values" on the stump while leading private lives marked by sexual impropriety.

Illicit sex, which is widespread among the powerful and their ambitious acolytes in Washington as elsewhere, appears to have been especially pervasive among Alabama leaders, who have typically kept up appearances by being married.

Those in both political parties were involved. But this column focuses upon those who especially touted their family values on their way to political victory, not upon the vanquished.

Why is this is relevant to politics and courts? Because the degree of hypocrisy and conniving required to sustain a promiscuous lifestyle at the same time as a virtuous public image is precisely the brazen skill-set that enables success in fund-raising, gerrymandering, voting machine rigging, and trumped-up criminal charges against political opponents.

Even those committed to Republican victories are sometimes repulsed by the methods and life-styles of major practitioners of the dark political arts. Yet these kinds of stories are extremely difficult to bring to public attention, important though they might be to the average voter operating on conventional wisdom.

I am among the DC-based reporters who have been approached by a longtime conservative journalist who had researched the ascendancy of gays and bisexuals in the national party leadership -- and was frustrated because his major outlet, a well-known conservative newspaper, would not print it. Among the veteran reporter's findings, never published, that was the existence of a so-called "Hairy Bear Club" purportedly involving well-known conservatives who liked hairy men. Those involved were said to have given themselves a nickname with confidence that such secrets remain hidden forever from their base of family values voters.

The public risks blackmail or other undue pressure on officials who may be compromised by hidden scandals. Reports have circulated for years in elite Alabama legal circles that Pryor was compromised by "badpuppy.com" photos held by well-connected Republicans with interests before the courts. I received a copies of several such photos -- purportedly of Pryor -- more than two years ago from a reliable source.

[Shuler's] columns allege serious legal, financial and other wrongdoing in Deep South courts. With the collapse of the traditional newspaper industry, his research is often the last hope of those who believe they cannot find justice in the courts. A typical recent column was headlined, Cases Of "Ken Nowlin And Penni Tingle In Mississippi Raise Red Flags About Criminal Defense Lawyers."

Many of his columns are republished on websites for more national audiences than his Legal Schnauzer site. The site is named after the couple's late pet, Murphy, a breed known for its digging prowess. . . .

Cision, a Chicago-based social media/marketing firm, compiled an annual ranking of "The Top 50 Independent Law Blogs in North America." It listed Legal Schnauzer at No. 37, with few of the others undertaken by a lone writer without corporate or non-profit group support.

Several of his recent investigative crusades have probed disgraceful financial and sexual by central figures in Alabama's power structure. These include many columns reporting that married officials were having affairs that indicated financial or other skulduggery hurting taxpayers.

I am not in a position to retrace and affirm all of Shuler's reporting on these and hundreds of other blogs. But I have worked with him on a number of sensitive columns for more than four years in which our reporting overlapped on at least two dozen published columns, including those involving Siegelman, witnesses in that case, and Karl Rove. In my opinion, Roger Shuler is an exceptionally capable, courageous, and public-spirited reporter.

For many litigants in Alabama especially, he is one of their last hopes for justice if they encounter an overzealous or other unjust prosecutor or judge.

At the Justice Department in Washington, the stage was being set for the era of "loyal Bushie" prosecutors who could retain their jobs by bringing politically oriented criminal prosecutions, we now know from reports about the scandal.

The real motivation for this was money, my research has indicated. Behind a veneer of rhetoric about good government, the goal is taxpayer-paid government contracts awarded on a political basis and business deals with foreign potentates. The well-connected could enjoy fabulous success. Token opposition leaders among Democrats could enjoy more modest prosperity so long as they muted criticism of the power structure.

President Obama has catered for the most part to the state's powerful Republican senators, Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby, by making timid presidential appointments. Among the most shameful was Obama's choice of George Beck . . . , defense attorney for Siegelman's main accuser Nick Bailey, to continue the Siegelman cover-up in effect as Canary's successor as U.S. Attorney.

Why? In my view, the president and his top team, including Attorney General Eric Holder, have many dirty, dark secrets of their own that are well-known to Republican power-brokers like Rove but almost entirely unknown to the general public. The leverage keeps national leaders in line -- or in "puppet" status as I describe it -- while the gravy train rolls ahead for insiders.

The controversy regarding Pryor and the photo is far more important than passing embarrassment to either the judge or the reporter, if proven wrong. Shuler purports to use this matter as a window into a sinister world of judges who lie in an unaccountable manner that ultimately hurts the general public.

In a largely independent manner, that's a similar conclusion I have reached in my new book, Presidential Puppetry, as have many others in Alabama and elsewhere horrified by corruption in the legal and political systems. The stakes are high enough so that I suggest learning the truth about the "badpuppy" photos is worth the effort.

In view of that rubber-stamp process, I suggest that Pryor would have more credibility if he would release his confirmation records to clear the air on the quality of the FBI/Senate investigation. Shuler has already asked for these documents, and reports that the judge has refused to supply them. They are public for the most part anyway.

Beyond that, Pryor could always sue Shuler and let the public learn the truth via discovery and courtroom verdict. That assumes, of course, that legal procedures fairly result in truth and justice. But there's always hope.

The Alabama Bureau of Investigations (ABI) is looking into images that appeared on then-popular gay porn site Badpuppy.com in the '90s. Reportedly working on a few tips, the ABI is concerned that the full-frontal images feature federal circuit Judge Bill Pryor. If the ABI confirms that the images are in fact those of the conservative Bush-appointee, there is a chance Pryor could be indicted for falsifying his background during his Congressional confirmation hearings. According to LegalSchnauzer, Congress commonly asks federal judicial appointees about "potentially embarrassing or compromising information in their backgrounds." Sources indicate that Pryor was aware the pics were public on the gay site (which was dubbed the "Wal Mart of gay porn") in 1997, a few years ahead of his appointment.

Funny thing, aficionado of the male form that I am I remember seeing these pics when they first came out. They were featured quite prominently in Bad Puppy's promotions. Judge Pryor is denying that these are actual pictures of him and while they seem to be the same guy I wasn't there so I couldn't tell you for sure.

Here's a little story that peaked my interest over the weekend, and I do mean peaked. It's the story of a struggling, broke college student trying to deal with the high cost of tuition, books, and housing expenses by earning a little honest money on the side. What the heck is wrong with that? Nothing if you ask me. But this youthful indiscretion is raising eyebrows, not so much for the "act" but for who this young man grew up to be.

But what I find striking about this story is that the scandal over the Judge's morality is centered around his possible youthful modeling career and not the bigoted, hateful positions and actions that he's taken as an adult "member"of the judiciary. I couldn't care less who he showed his body to. What I care about is that he would deny people like me equal protection under the law.

That's immoral.

Everybody deserves to be treated equally; gays, lesbians, bisexuals, the transgendered and judges who exposed their private parts for fast cash! For not understanding that simple fact, Judge Pryor you are one bad, bad puppy.

PBC: It appears [the judge] has reached an arbitrary finding that you have, in fact, defamed these parties. I'm aghast that this could occur without your participation . . .  

LS: It can't, under the law. . . . I'm convinced the preliminary injunction was written by Rob Riley's office, and that happens a lot. . . . Even with (lawful service), we had less than 24 hours notice. The law is that you have sufficient notice to respond in writing, to call witnesses. This is not a minor deal. Preliminary injunctions aren't something judges are to toss out like baseball cards. . . . You don't know whether to get angry or laugh about it . . . this is so absurd. Most people intuitively know that this isn't right. You almost have to laugh, like it's an episode of "Hee Haw."

Civil contempt is the "willful, continuing failure or refusal of any person to comply with a court's lawful writ, subpoena, process, order, rule or command that by its nature is still capable of being complied with. . . . " 

The Respondents' [my wife and me] above-described non-compliance with TRO and the Preliminary Injunction constitutes on-going civil, constructive contempt. Respondents' on-going contempt not only is an affront to this Court's clear orders, it causes on-going injury to Petitioners [Riley and Liberty Duke] through the continued publication of false, defamatory, and libelous statements.

Judge Claud Neilson

In Near, the U.S. Supreme Court saw that kind of thuggery coming and wrote the following:
When a newspaper or periodical is found to be "malicious, scandalous and defamatory," and is suppressed as such, resumption of publication is punishable as a contempt of court by fine or imprisonment. Thus, where a newspaper or periodical has been suppressed because of the circulation of charges against public officers of official misconduct, it would seem to be clear that the renewal of the publication of such charges would constitute a contempt and that the judgment would lay a permanent restraint upon the publisher, to escape which he must satisfy the court as to the character of a new publication. Whether he would be permitted again to publish matter deemed to be derogatory to the same or other public officers would depend upon the court's ruling.

Judge Claud Neilson

Southern Homes argues, among other things, that it received insufficient notice under Rule 65(a)(1), Ala. R. Civ. P., of the hearing on Bermuda's motion for a preliminary injunction, in violation of Southern Homes' due-process rights. We agree.

Rule 65(a)(1), Ala. R. Civ. P., provides that "[n]o preliminary injunction shall be issued without notice to the adverse party." Rule 65(a)(1) does not specify how much notice must be given to the adverse party before a preliminary injunction can be issued. However, as the United States Supreme Court has held in interpreting the federal equivalent of Rule 65(a),2 the notice required by Rule 65(a) "implies a hearing in which the defendant is given a fair opportunity to oppose the application and to prepare for such opposition." Granny Goose Foods, Inc. v. Brotherhood of Teamsters & Auto Truck Drivers Local No. 70 of Alameda County, 415 U.S. 423, 434 n. 7, 94 S.Ct. 1113, 39 L.Ed.2d 435 (1974). See also Alabama Republican Party v. McGinley, 893 So.2d 337, 344 (Ala.2004) (holding that "[t]he hallmarks of procedural due process are notice and `the opportunity to be heard "at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner."'

In Granny Goose Foods, the adverse party was given notice by telephone on the same day it was served with all the documents and the hearing was held, and the adverse party's counsel was present in the courtroom and argued on behalf of the adverse party at that hearing. The United States Supreme Court recognized that Rule 65(b), Fed.R.Civ.P., like Rule 65(b), Ala. R. Civ. P., authorizes a trial court to issue a 10-day temporary restraining order ("TRO") without notice to the adverse party. The Court compared the lack of any requirement of notice in Rule 65(b) for a TRO with the explicit notice requirement for issuing a preliminary injunction under Rule 65(a), Fed.R.Civ.P. The Court held that the "informal, same-day notice" that was provided to the adverse party in Granny Goose Foods, "desirable though it may be before a restraining order is issued, is no substitute for the more thorough notice requirements which must be satisfied to obtain a preliminary injunction of potentially unlimited duration." 415 U.S. at 434 n. 7, 94 S.Ct. 1113. See also Ciena Corp. v. Jarrard, 203 F.3d 312, 319 (4th Cir.2000) (holding that "[b]ecause a preliminary injunction is unlimited in duration, its entry always requires notice to the opposing party sufficient to give that party an opportunity to prepare an opposition to entry of an injunction").

In the present case, it is undisputed that Southern Homes had less than two hours' notice of the hearing on Bermuda's motion for a preliminary injunction and that Southern Homes' counsel participated in the hearing only by telephone. Southern Homes was not able to submit written arguments in opposition to the motion or to submit evidence to support its arguments. Also, under the circumstances, Southern Homes could not call any witnesses. . . .

Southern Homes had to be given notice of a hearing in which it was given a fair opportunity to oppose the motion for the preliminary injunction and to prepare for such opposition. Southern Homes simply was not given such notice. Therefore, under these circumstances, we conclude that Southern Homes did not have a fair opportunity to oppose the motion for a preliminary injunction, and, thus, the circuit court exceeded its discretion in issuing the preliminary injunction.

Alan Colmes

One of the nation's leading liberal voices is shining a spotlight on Alabama Republican Rob Riley and his efforts to shut down our reporting about Riley's extramarital affair with lobbyist Liberty Duke.

Last week, an Alabama sheriff made what appeared to be a bogus traffic stop in an attempt to serve whistleblowing legal blogger Roger Shuler with legal papers. Rob Riley, a big player in Alabama GOP politics, had apparently filed an injunction against Shuler connected to Shuler’s having exposed Riley’s extramarital affair with Liberty Duke.

In a true Keystone Kourts move, Riley now seeks to have Shuler held in contempt of court.

Moves like that can ricochet back on the perpetrator pretty badly — especially as Shuler’s travails are being picked up by moire and more Internet sites. Riley is inadvertently begging for mainstream media coverage with his ill-conceived legal moves. As a certain other web site is fond of saying, “Developing Hard" . . .

Following a week of intimidation and attempted unlawful service of papers on a law blogger whose national profile is rapidly on the rise, more pieces of the story are falling into place.

People who follow Alabama politics might well have put two and two together to figure out what was behind an apparent intimidation campaign targeting Roger Shuler, whose outspoken blog Legal Schnauzer has pulled no punches on matters of corruption in Alabama’s legal and judicial community.

Last Thursday, Shuler confirmed that one Rob Riley had filed a civil case against him, which explains a litany of visits and one very questionable “traffic stop” by local law enforcement.

This should come as no surprise to anyone. Rob Riley’s legal tactics are not unlike those of Tea Party Republicans who have realized that they have overplayed their hand with the government shutdown and a possible debt default and cannot dig themselves out of the hole they made.

In both cases, their actions are too little, too late.

Bill Pryor

Strabismus is a failure of the two eyes to maintain proper alignment and work together as a team.

If you have strabismus, one eye looks directly at the object you are viewing, while the other eye is misaligned inward (esotropia, "crossed eyes" or "cross-eyed"), outward (exotropia or "wall-eyed"), upward (hypertropia) or downward (hypotropia).

Strabismus can be constant or intermittent. The misalignment also might always affect the same eye (unilateral strabismus), or the two eyes may take turns being misaligned (alternating strabismus).

In most cases, the only effective treatment for a constant eye turn is strabismus surgery. If your general eye doctor finds that your child has strabismus, he or she can refer you to an ophthalmologist who specializes in strabismus surgery.

The success of strabismus surgery depends on many factors, including the direction and magnitude of the eye turn. In some cases, more than one surgery may be required. The strabismus surgeon can give you more information about this during a pre-surgical consultation.

Strabismus surgery also can effectively align the eyes of adults with long-standing strabismus. In many cases of adult strabismus, however, a significant degree of amblyopia may remain even after the affected eye is properly aligned. This is why early treatment of strabismus is so important.

The earlier strabismus is treated surgically, the more likely it is that the affected eye will develop normal visual acuity and the two eyes will function together properly as a team.

Tony Farese

During this meeting, Petitioner explained how and why he paid Massey the way he did. He also told them about the letter Mr. Massey said he had that allowed Petitioner to pay Mr. Massey the way he did. When Mr. Dawson asked Petitioner for a copy of the letter, Petitioner told him that he did not have one but they could get a copy of the letter from Mr. Massey. He explained that he and Mr. Massey did not conspire to hide anything and that there was no kickback or bribe involved in the way he paid Mr. Massey. Petitioner told them that Mr. Massey did not even know how he was paying him.

Partly on my advice, Ken pled guilty on July 27, 2007. On September 28, 2007, I drove Ken to Ashland to see Farese. During this meeting, Ken told Farese that he wanted to withdraw his guilty pleea and tried to explain to Farese that he would have earned his four percent override on the Lafayette County insurance account no matter who had the insurance with the county. Farese became very angry and told Ken that he could not understand how he had ever made what he had made of himself as dumb as he was. Farese told us that we were not going to embarrass him and started dictating a letter saying that he was getting out of the case and told us to get out of his office.

Farese called me later that day and told me that if Ken was allowed to withdraw his guilty plea, he could be going to prison for 75 years. Farese also told me that if Ken insisted in going to trial, it would cost Ken more than $200,000. On my advice, Ken wrote Farese and told him that he did not want to withdraw his guilty plea . . .

Bill Pryor at badpuppy.com

A former state attorney general of Alabama from 1997-2003 (and the youngest state attorney general at the time), Judge William Pryor was nominated to the Eleventh Circuit by President George W. Bush in April, 2003.

Since then, the staunchly conservative judge has proven to be an outspoken homophobe. In 2005, Pryor wrote a brief to the Supreme Court on behalf of the Texas anti-sodomy law where he argued that decriminalized gay sex would lead to legalized necrophilia, bestiality and child pornography.

Lambda Legal Task Force President called him “an ideological tyrant of the highest order.”

Gay Porn Blog has been blogging about gay porn since there was an internet with porn to blog about. It has been featured in Salon, Slate, Huffington Post, Out and many others.

It is run by Mike Stabile and Jack Shamama. Jack Shamama was born in Brooklyn and moved to Miami’s tony South Beach for his adolescence. He’s been fending off men ever since. Jack prefers Yoko Ono and Jessica Simpson.

Mike Stabile first discovered the power of porn in boarding school, when he would trade his father’s Playboy centerfolds for social currency. He’s been trading sex for favors ever since. Mike likes John Lennon and Ashlee Simpson.

Mike and Jack have been best friends since college and both work in the gay porn industry. Their writing has, collectively and separately, appeared in magazines such as Playboy, Daily Beast, Salon, Huffington Post, the Village Voice, Pug Talk, Out.com and others.

It seems like it could very well be Pryor, who is a married father of two. Posing naked is not something we would normally chide someone for doing. Given the fact that he’s been classified as one of the most demonstrably anti-gay judicial nominees in recent memory adds a level of hypocrisy to the whole equation. What do you guys think? (Also, if anyone has any of the other 11 photos from the set, please feel free to email them to us!)

Bill Pryor

Bill:

This is a followup on my reporting at Legal Schnauzer.

Do you have a condition known as strabismus, which is a crossing or misalignment of the eyes?

Have you ever been treated for strabismus?

Would you release copies of your medical records as it relates to any and all eye care?

Thank you,

Roger Shuler

Wayne Madsen

Roger Shuler, a veteran journalist with 13 years with the Birmingham News and a graduate of the University of Missouri's School of Journalism, one of America's top journalism education institutions, now knows what it's like to be a journalist in a Third World country like Sierra Leone or Honduras.

After writing a series of articles on his website Legal Schnauzer, Shuler has been hit with a "nuisance subpoena" by prospective GOP U.S. House candidate Rob Riley, the son of Alabama's former Governor Bob Riley, the man whose political chicanery and vote count rigging cost Democratic Governor Don Siegelman his job in the 2002 election and paved the way for Bob Riley to move into the Governor's Mansion in Montgomery for two terms. The younger Riley is planning to run for the seat of retiring Representative Spencer Bachus and is launching his bid by silencing Shuler, one of Alabama's most outspoken muckraking journalists bird dogging to Rileys and their nepotistic and kleptocratic political corruption.

Junior Samples

Shuler's latest story concerns nude photographs of Pryor published by a gay porn website specializing in erotica featuring young males. So what's the problem if Pryor was of legal age at the time the photos were taken? Shuler nails it in one sentence: "In 2005, Pryor wrote a brief to the Supreme Court on behalf of the Texas anti-sodomy law where he argued that decriminalized gay sex would lead to legalized necrophilia, bestiality and child pornography." Well now. I guess the Eleventh Circuit should ensure that Pryor keeps his distance from funeral homes, barns, and day care centers.

WMR has been reporting on political and judicial malfeasance in Alabama for a number of years. Overall, Alabama Republican politicians and judges evoke memories of Al Capp's Jubilation T. Cornpone, Hee Haw's Junior Samples, and Green Acres's Eustace Charleston Haney, otherwise known as "Mr. Haney." Bumbling, goofball, ignorant, and corrupt vestiges of a bygone plantation-era South don't even come close to describing what passes for judges and political leaders in the state that refers to itself as the "Heart of Dixie."

Rob Riley convinced Alabama Supreme Court Judge Roy Moore, of Ten Commandments-in-the-courtroom infamy, to appoint retired Alabama state judge, Claud Neilson, to act as a special judge to handle a lawsuit brought by Rob Riley against Shuler and his wife. Neilson is the man who, in 2009, dismissed remaining deadlocked counts after a jury voted not guilty on the majority of sexual abuse, sodomy, and assault charges brought against Mobile Circuit Court Judge Herman Thomas. After Riley Junior submitted a motion for all matters in his suit against Shuler to be sealed, Neilson agreed.

Only in Alabama could a journalist be enjoined by a judge not to write about a candidate for public office. This action by Neilson is a flagrant violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Alabama remains subject to the U.S. Bill of Rights, regardless of what the Tea Party and its ZZ Top- and Charlie Daniels-looking truckers and motorcyclists may believe.

Reporting on Alabama politicians is like taking a walk down nostalgia lane behind the "Kudzu Curtain"

The actions by Neilson raises the issue now being debated in Washington about media shield laws for journalists. A number of entrenched politicians, including Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas and Democrat Dianne Feinstein of California, do not believe independent journalists with websites, blogs, or newsletters should be considered journalists under a federal shield law that would protect only corporate journalists from having to testify before juries and grand juries about their sources. . .

The Alabama nuisance subpoena, SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) suit, and court gag order against Shuler and his wife not only have repercussions for the press in Alabama but a finding against Shuler and Legal Schnauzer will definitely be used as cited case law for other corrupt politicians to bring legal action against independent journalists in other jurisdictions far beyond Alabama.

Rob Riley

Pursuant to Ala. R. Civ. P. 70A(c)(2), Respondents [Mrs. Schnauzer and me] are hereby notified that failure to appear at the aforesaid hearing may result in an issuance of a writ of arrest pursuant to Ala. R. Civ. P. 70A(d) to compel the Respondents' presence.