Best has finally revealed that he has been served. He created a second blog in my name and the first remains hidden (too late of course as I already have a printed copy). He noted the 13 points of the Statement of Claim, and in the entry only addressed three of them. The claim re being called brain damaged and a mental case, the abuse of all other Autistics, and the removal of the two blogs.
Best is a liar.
First of all, his claim that I have proven myself to be a mental case because I oppose the concept that mercury poisoning causes Autism is ridiculous. That proves me to be completely sane, because the concept is a lot of BS and the vast majority of the scientific community agrees.
Second, Best makes reference to my claims regarding the treatment of his son and he lied again about that. All I have to do is present Best’s own words and it will show that Best was trying to treat Autism and wasn’t concentrating on the gut symptoms. I therefore consider my comments to be justified and true.
Third – and this is the big one – he tries to prevent the deletion of his blogs via him being in the United States and therefore protected by the first amendment. Nope! The offence occurred in Victoria, Australia. He makes the same mistake Dow Jones did in their case against Joe Gutnick as to where publication took place. Publication occurs when an Internet browser calls upon a website address and it shows on the computer screen. The origin of the creation is irrelevant (see Calder v Jones in the Supreme Court of California in 1984 as well as Dow Jones v Gutnick).
He didn’t address anything else, but he did claim to have legal representation. Dewey, Cheatem and Howe. Yeah right – The Three Stooges would be laughing themselves at that one! That was their creation! He also claims to have sent a note to the Supreme Court of Victoria. I’ve faxed the Prothonotary requesting the retaining of what may probably be a letter from a lunatic, and sending me a copy when it arrives – if it does.
He also rejected the idea of counter suing me, upon that same belief re being crazy. At the earliest opportunity I will be inviting him to counter sue, and state that I will NOT be claiming insanity as a defence. I don’t need to. I am sane and I can prove it – and in the finish it’s possible that the court will consider Best as the idiot.
The blog entry will be retained also.
HARB Commentary Blog 