Bob Atchison: Where's The Beef?
I thought this was a nice comment and response with regards to the statement made by Oma Hamou...
Mr. Manning said...
"...I hope Oma has had personal time, because there is no denial that she went through enormous suffering. People need time to digest!"
Mike (Newson) said...
"...Oma has had some personal time, a time to breathe and gain perspective. In many ways this breathing room time was forced on her as she waits to see what law enforcement is going to do, and while her legal team does its work on the civil end. Looking at it from a distance, I’d say that the civil actions have been put on hold waiting for the criminal side of things to catch up with them.
I think Oma has been able to see more clearly that she can not forgive and forget and just walk away as she wanted to do six years ago, as the other side won’t let it be. Plus, this whole issue has reached world wide proportions and too many people now have an interest in what will happen to just let it be.
This epic will be finished and taken to completion, and my personal guess looking at the documentation is that Oma will emerge having been fully vindicated. It would have been over if Bob had played fair in court, but as perjury was involved, well that she won’t just let it be. If Oma had lost fair and square then it would have been over, but not this way.
Mr. Manning said...
"...I hope Oma has had personal time, because there is no denial that she went through enormous suffering. People need time to digest!"
Mike (Newson) said...
"...Oma has had some personal time, a time to breathe and gain perspective. In many ways this breathing room time was forced on her as she waits to see what law enforcement is going to do, and while her legal team does its work on the civil end. Looking at it from a distance, I’d say that the civil actions have been put on hold waiting for the criminal side of things to catch up with them.
I think Oma has been able to see more clearly that she can not forgive and forget and just walk away as she wanted to do six years ago, as the other side won’t let it be. Plus, this whole issue has reached world wide proportions and too many people now have an interest in what will happen to just let it be.
This epic will be finished and taken to completion, and my personal guess looking at the documentation is that Oma will emerge having been fully vindicated. It would have been over if Bob had played fair in court, but as perjury was involved, well that she won’t just let it be. If Oma had lost fair and square then it would have been over, but not this way.
One point that bugs me, “they” say that we don’t prove our points (although it seems to me that using “their” own documentation to prove Oma’s points, documents that were sworn to the courts to be true, is pretty good proof) and they say that they do prove their points using “public” records that we have shown over and over that they could not read properly, or more likely the did not want to read properly...
Anyway, ... Think about this point. The current big thorn is that Bob lied to the courts about a previous law suit settling things, he and his lawyer swore to the courts that what Oma was talking about in court was old business and it had been settled and was not bearing on the current issue. That was the main point that shot Oma down. So the big question is --- All Bob had to do is publish this settlement. Why has he not done so to prove that he did not commit perjury?
Could it be that Oma is correct and there was no settlement? One other point, if Bob and Rob were willing to settle this and negotiated with Oma’s lawyer to issue a retraction saying that what they had said about Oma was false, and that they promised to never do it again (so to speak) does the fact that they entered into this negotiation at all --- let alone modifying and issuing their own version of this retraction to Oma’s lawyer, a version which was agreed on by both sides yet never signed, not validate Oma?
http://alexanderpalaceobsession.blogspot.com/2007/04/oma-hamou-issues-statement-about-bob.html
Anyway, ... Think about this point. The current big thorn is that Bob lied to the courts about a previous law suit settling things, he and his lawyer swore to the courts that what Oma was talking about in court was old business and it had been settled and was not bearing on the current issue. That was the main point that shot Oma down. So the big question is --- All Bob had to do is publish this settlement. Why has he not done so to prove that he did not commit perjury?
Could it be that Oma is correct and there was no settlement? One other point, if Bob and Rob were willing to settle this and negotiated with Oma’s lawyer to issue a retraction saying that what they had said about Oma was false, and that they promised to never do it again (so to speak) does the fact that they entered into this negotiation at all --- let alone modifying and issuing their own version of this retraction to Oma’s lawyer, a version which was agreed on by both sides yet never signed, not validate Oma?
http://alexanderpalaceobsession.blogspot.com/2007/04/oma-hamou-issues-statement-about-bob.html
[comment section]
Labels: Bob Atchison, Mike Newson, Oma Hamou, Perjury
posted by Sandman at 7:57 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home