Part 9 – Zane Seipler’s Argument that His Case Shouldn’t Be Dismissed for Contempt of Court

B. The Plaintiff did not upload the documents onto the web or pressure his wife to do so. Mrs. Seipler uploaded the documents out of anger, fear and concern for her family. (continued)

Nevertheless, Rosa did not tell Zane — or anyone else — that she posted the disputed materials.

Mrs. Seipler had previously posted comments on a number of media websites, such as the Daily Herald, the Northwest Herald, and the Woodstock Advocate.

Zane had told Rosa that he did not want her to post information on the web and they had often argued about this. (Id. at 1473).

When Mrs. Seipler started posting in 2009, Zane objected, concerned that the material she posted could harm his campaign for Sheriff. (Id. at 1479-1481).

Mrs. Seipler continued to post comments in late 2009-2010 but without posting her name, in order to avoid arguments about this with her husband. (Id. at 1483-1484).

Rosa did not tell Zane that she posted the materials to the Real MCSO website or the Shadow Website until August, 2011 because she did not want to create “problems” between her and her husband. (Id. at 1488-1490).

Zane Seipler leads his wife and lawyers out of the Rockford Federal Courthouse.

Zane Seipler leads his wife and lawyers out of the Rockford Federal Courthouse.

When Mrs. Seipler overheard Zane telling his attorney in a telephone conversation that he had not posted the materials on the web, she felt compelled to tell her husband that it was she [w]ho had done so.

She posted the documents, Rosa told Zane, because she feared that he was going to be criminally prosecuted and was in “big trouble” (Id. at 1494).

That same evening, Mrs. Seipler and Mr. Horwitz spoke on the phone and Mr. Horwitz asked her if she knew who had posted the materials on the Real MCSO and Shadow websites.

When Mrs. Seipler told Mr. Horwitz that she was not going to tell him. Mr. Horwitz posed certain hypotheticals to Mrs. Seipler and then advised her to consult with her own lawyer. (Id. at 1494-1495.)

In September, 2011, Mrs. Seipler contacted Mr. John Nelson, who was her attorney at that time. (Id. at 1497-1498).

After she and Mr. Nelson spoke in October, 2011, she chose Mr. Dennis Giovanni to represent; she had come to the conclusion that Mr. Giovanni would be more zealous in her defense.

She secured the services of another attorney who she felt was better suited, based on his level of interest in defense of Ms. Seipler, Dennis Giovanni. (Id. at 1497-1498).

Mrs. Seipler engaged an attorney because she was not sure whether she would be criminally prosecuted and at that time, she was the family’s sole breadwinner. (Id. at 1499).

The evidence does not support Defendants’ contention that the Plaintiff posted the disputed materials onto the web or that he induced his wife to do so. The motion should be denied.

Part 10 tomorrow.


Comments

Part 9 – Zane Seipler’s Argument that His Case Shouldn’t Be Dismissed for Contempt of Court — 7 Comments

  1. Enough about Zane Seipler, please, Cal, write about something that really matters like how to improve our county or basic news about what’s happening in the county.
    Seipler is obviously biased with everything because he is married to a hispanic woman, enough said.

  2. isabella, what a pathetic thing to say. There are so many things wrong in the sheriff’s dept that need to be addressed. So much corruption in so many areas and you make a bigoted remark!!

  3. Isabella shows that the source of stupid comments is not limited by gender.

  4. Isabella, I see that you also commented in another article extolling the”virtues” of Andy Zinke. That along with this comment speaks volumes about your values.

Add Comment Register



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>