J’accuse- The Accusers- the CRA(p)
Here we are coming full circle – In J’accuse ( found here )
Everyday you have to prove innocence because someone made an accusation, that on the face of it, was believable. You spend your days “explaining” and your nights waiting for the next phone call or knock on the door wanting to know what you are doing and where you have been .
It is only when you look into the “rest of the story” that you realize that as ridiculous as these accusations really were the suffering, expense and the toll on a family -wasn’t funny.
So I will continue to “make it my business”-having lived through “J’accuse”- to make sure that no one else (no matter who) doesn’t have to go through the same thing-
I will take accusations with skepticism , especially by ”nom de plumes” in the same context as a
“man in a tree in a dress, shooting a ray gun that makes steel doors disappear, whilst waggling through a slit in the fence.”
Accusations: I first wrote about the CRA situation in Lorain on November 24th 2006– long before anyone else was interested- and I attended meetings when there was not one “real media” person there at all
Whether you agree with the program or not is NOT the point of this post.
I have probably written more posts, read more documents, know the players better than anyone- when it comes to this situation I WAS NOT a surface dweller .
I wrote in January 2008 the following post on this blog:
CRA or Confusion Runs Amuck https://thatwoman.wordpress.com/2008/01/28/cra-or-confusion-runs-amuck/
Now don’t bother to follow any of the links in that article because the PD article is “no longer available”- the links to the articles on WoM are no longer available – SIGH and even the Supreme Court Case and Attorney Chandra’s diatribe as to his accusations has been moved.
BUT as a gentle reminder of what was printed and who said what in the Plain Dealer article October 28 th 2007 written by Leila Atassi you can access word documents ( yeah I saved it) of that article
Page 2pd page2
So after you have played catchup I will continue with “the rest of the story” as this Plain Dealer article was the most damaging to the reputation( in my opinion) to the “accused” and was “used in the legalese” sent to the Ohio Supreme Court by Mark Stewart’s Attorney- Subodh Chandra.
The ONLY article used in the argument for dismissal (page 55 of 84 (Motion to Dismiss) the Ohio Supreme Court Case Is that Plain Dealer article
Although in April and May of 2007 ( a year after the legislation was approved) at least three council people (all whom worked for the county) and two for the auditor, Mark Stewart, at the time Councilman Snodgrass – Greg Holcomb (now in Congresswoman Sutton’s office) – Phil Beltleski (pot calling the kettle black)
They all had their accusations documented as well- they accused and interpreted the law to their own spin : Remember as you read the accusations – the “accused” maintained NO wrong doing right from the very beginning- but his voice was not heard –
Time after time in print and in the public arena the man was maligned in the press and in public– but the conspiracy theorists and the finger pointers had found a “scape goat”- rather than – in my opinion – admit to their own “professional failings”. For three years this continued- a reputation besmirched why? how? Because of J’Accuse
NOTE:You can access all the CRA posts on this blog here
TO BE CONTINUED……….