My response to your piece on my piece is this: I am no Brinkman fan, but the rule of law still governs... If you have evidence that implicates Brinkman in a crime, step on up to the plate and deliver. Otherwise, you are quite likely engaging in libel. This judge had no right to say what he has said either. By implicating that Brinkman was "guilty" of a crime when there has been no charges filed against him, let alone a trial, is a serious miscarriage of justice. In order for Brinkman to be guilty, you have to be able to prove it in a court of law. My point is this: You need more than the rantings of a judge and a few posts from bloggers. You need something called "evidence." Any of you lawyer-types out there can feel free to chime on in here at any time and correct me if I'm wrong...
Personally, I think there is more fire here than just this issue of changing the names and/or addresses...but this story is still developing, so we'll just have to see.
