Re: million dollar digs

Original Message --------


RE: million-dollar digs


Tue, 2 Sep 2003 15:03:18 -0400


"John Sugg" <>



 Please cite the errors. I hate to remind you of Journalism 101, but public records enjoy a privilege. Quoting accurately, even reasonable interpretation, from a public record is a near-absolute defense. A non-specific assertion that the records are in error would not (1) detract from their privilege and (2) could not be construed as sufficient warning of an error even if the privilege did not apply. So, quit playing games and making threats, and cite the error.For example, there could be an incidental mistake in spelling that doesn't detract from the overall accuracy of the document. Or, as is possibly the case here, I've been told that you and Jane are no longer married. So the "error" could be the reference to the two of you as spouses.If there is another interpretation, please provide it, along with your documentation that PRIVILEGED public records are in error. And, considering how much you bemoaned not getting sufficient press coverage of issues related to your case (see Jane's piece in Into the Buzzsaw), you are not only are a public figure, but are a vortex public figure. And, since you have made your finances a matter of public concern -- urging supporters to help you get back on your feet in a case you sought publicity about -- then examination of your finances is fair game. The questions still stand.

                    "Absolute truth is a very rare and dangerous commodity
                           in the context of professional journalism."
                                      -- Hunter S. Thompson

John Sugg
Senior Editor
Creative Loafing
Atlanta, Georgia