Dear Attorney Bayard:Congratulations on a well-distinguished career, one in which I am certain -- or at least hope -- you've never seen anything quite so absurd.
You wrote:
"....I can't imagine anything that would justify such a sweeping prior restraint on his speech....It looks like the court failed to brush up on some basics of defamation and First Amendment law before issuing its order."
I understand your concerns. To make things clear, all I saw in Mr. Gillenwater's blog were references to Judge Diane Moriarty's Decision, which is copied in full in the JPEGs. There was one thing he said that was not in the public record, and it was a reference to alleged "hush money" he claimed that Denner paid him from time to time. As you deftly point out, that is an issue for Denner to sue over in Defamation but it is not anything over which a court may issue a prior restraint. In sum, give Denner his Day in Court.
But give Derrick Gillenwater his Day in Court as well. A full and fair Day at that.
Food for thought -- Mr. Gillenwater is a music producer and more recently a singer, which is how I overheard him talking about music and his case. To my knowledge he has not written about the specifics of these recent developments, but in his life story song I obtained on a CD, he does reference it. I look forward to a copyright or registration filing so it can hit the Internet, along with his next song about it.
1 comment:
To me it is the sheer arrogance of lawyers like Denner who use positions of power and influence to truncate the Rights of little people like Mr. Gillenwater that I find most offensive.
The fact that the Court granted imprimatur to such attitude is equally compelling, equally disturbing.
Remember, I am historically a fan of Jeffrey Denner, but this is beyond the pale.
Post a Comment