An Editor’s Copy of "Anonymous" Greg Aymond’s Entr…

An Editor’s Copy of “Anonymous” Greg Aymond’s Entry in Cenla Antics:
(Disclaimer: I don’t know Mr. Aymond, and I don’t know the reasons I should care about this case. I’m sorry. I just couldn’t help myself).

Anonymous said…

I am Greg Aymond that everyone seems to have an opinion of. I am the Greg Aymond of which everyone seems to have an opinion. I sued Rich Dupre for slander, based 2 (two)separate and distinct acts of slander. First(,)he told a fellow board metting meeting thing I allegedly said in a meeting with Rich, in order to influence him to vote against me that morning. Not following you, Greg. He told a meeting board “thing”? What is a meeting board thing? The meeting never took place, as can be heard from my recording of my telephone conversation with Rich. Do you record all of your telephone conversations? Lawyers, gotta love ’em. Additionally, you can hear on that tape Rich Dupree (…you can hear Rich Dupree on that tape) telling me that my termination was political and in relation to the Roy Hebron matter, and had no reflections upon my legal ability. Almost a run-on sentence. No comma necessary. Yet approximately 2 (two) weeks later, he stated, also on tape and to a crowd of people, that my termination had nothing to do with Roy Hebron and that it was due to a lack of confidence in my legal abilities. You can also hear Dupree on tape, however, requesting that I continue to handle the ongoing litigation for the Water District. The Water District has, thus far, provided Dupree with legal defense in my lawsuit, although he had been removed from the Water Board by the Police Jury before the suit had been filed. Additionally, after the suit was filed, Pineville City Attorney, Jimmy Fairclothe, (Is this the correct spelling?) send (sent)me a letter denying me contact with the witness, Thurman Kelly of Pineville. With all due respect, there has to be something you’re not telling the reader. Try revealing something about the narrator. Additionally, the Waterworks attorney, Greg Jones, posted memos to the Water District staff they they (that they)could not diiscuss (discuss) the Dupree case with me.
When the 971 motion was filed by Dupree, it immediately stops the taking of depositions and requires the submission of affidavits. As there was no way I could obtain affidavits from the witnesses, (no comma necessary) and much of the evidence is on recorded tapes and in documents only available from the Waterworks, I filed a motion for discovery, as is allowed by 971. Wordy. Try splitting this sentence into two sentences.Article 971 states that there is to be an evidentiary hearing on that discovery motion. However, after sending subpoenas out for a showing of how I had been denied the ability to obtain affidavits, (no comma necessary) and Mr. Jones admitting to Judge Jackson in chambers that he had so instructed the waterworks employees, Judge Jackson dismissed my entirte (entire) case, and without granting me the hearing required by 971. I was also ordered to pay the attorney fees of Dupree and all court costs.
To clarify, there has never been a hearing on the merits of my claims. No court of law has ever heard the Dupree tapes. Is it possible that these tapes were recorded illegally? I’m missing a part of the story here. Explain to your reader why the law is in your favor. There was a 3 (All numbers under 100 should be spelled in letters; three) judge panel on the court of appeal (proper noun) who decided the appeal, in a 2 (two) to 1 (one) split. Based upon the strong dissent in my favor, a (scratch the lonely a) I am considering requesting a re-hearing (one word, rehearing)before the entire appellate court. Depending upon that outcome, I will consider applying for writs to the Louisiana Supreme Court.
Several things one should consider are: Why haven’t any of the people I have been reporting for wrongdoing sued me? Perhaps because they know truth is an absolute defense. Perhaps they’re not threatened by you and don’t want anything from you. The narrator should extend more empathy toward his advisary in order to make the story more believable. As an attorney for 20 (twenty)years, I am careful in saying only what I can prove. Additionally, why is someone allegedly honest (Honest should be in quotations. Otherwise the sentence reads like, “…allegedly honest working) working so hard to stop a court of law from hearing his own words captured on tape? Do I have an ongoing vendetta? Yes I do. I will continue to vigorously work to expose lawbreakers and public officials who act contrary to serving the public. (The public? What does this case really have to do with the public?)As to the Anonomous (Anonymous) writer who said such bitter things against me here, I suspect that is Waterboard member Roger Toney, as he has never learned that my surname has no “s” on the end. (You better hope you’re right Mr. Aymond. Otherwise you may have just committed libel).Keep in mind, if it is, Roger, (,if it is Roger,) as have other Board members, has already been found to be unethical by the State Ethics Board. Anyone who doesn’t belive (believe) me, feel free to contact my office to hear and see the truth. Just direct the reader to a website. It’d make you much more believable.I personally do not understand how any American citizen can support witholding (withholding) evidence and the truth. Thank you.
No, thank you.