Part 11 – Zane Seipler’s Argument that His Case Shouldn’t Be Dismissed for Contempt of Court

Zane Seipler campaigning for Sheriff on Primary Election Day in 2010.

Zane Seipler campaigning for Sheriff on Primary Election Day in 2010.

C. Defendants’ version of events makes little sense. (continued)

Moreover, the Google subpoenas were sent to Plaintiff’s counsel on June 15, July 6, and August 1, 2011. (Sotos TR. at 1280, 1278, 1285, 1289-1290.)

Plaintiff also knew that Defendants were seeking sanctions for his alleged posting of confidential material onto the web.

However, the Shadow website, which contained the confidential documents (Sotos, Tr., 966) continued until approximately August 15, 2011 [FN8].

= = = = =

FN8 The last known date for the shutdown of the Shadow website is August 15, 2011. [Def. Ex. 31, Defs. Supp. R26 Disc. 006246]. The last publication to the website was August 8, 2011, Id. at 6245.

= = = = =

Defendants maintain that Plaintiff continued for two months to post confidential materials from his home computer to the web, either alone or in collusion with his wife – precisely the activity for which Defendants were seeking sanctions.

This simply makes no sense.

Defendants’ construction of circumstantial evidence does not support their contention that the Plaintiff or the Plaintiff together with his wife posted the disputed materials on the Real MCSO Exposed or the Shadow websites.

Clearly, as Defendants argue, if the Plaintiff got “caught”[FN9] he would not continue to post documents for two months after the June motion for sanctions.

On the contrary, the evidence reveals Defendants’ version of events to be illogical.

The motion should be denied.

= = = = =

FN9 Sotos believed that Zane just got caught (Sotos, Tr. 1039).

= = = = =

Part 12 tomorrow.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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