Follow us!

    Re: Libel

    Posted by Deborah on 10/05/10

    I will forward this to Daniel Becnel and you never know when Fannie might
    decide to review all the paperwork.

    On 10/04/10, Mike B. wrote:
    > Yeah, why don't you do that Deborah. Tell Danny I said "hi" and I'm
    > really glad he lost the election to the court of appeals.
    > Yep, Fannie Mae came to vist me at my plantation a few months ago. She
    > and I are on good terms. Jealous?
    > On 10/03/10, Deborah wrote:
    >> Perhaps I should ask Daniel Becnel to look at this? He might be very
    >> interested.
    >> On 10/02/10, Deborah wrote:
    >>> Daniel Becnel said not related to Michael E Becnel and that he didn't
    >>> even know him, and he put it in writing.
    >>> Fannie Mae ever follow up on your purchases?
    >>> On 10/01/10, Mike B. wrote:
    >>>> You "mentioned" this archaic BS years ago. You don't scare me with
    >>>> your inuendo about lawyers, judges and whatever else goes through
    >>>> your addled mind.
    >>>> Since when does "relative" equal "brother"? That just proves the
    >>>> point that you and Sharon hear what you want to hear, and don't
    >>>> actually "listen" to what's being said. Who or what do you blame
    >>>> for that disability?
    >>>> On 10/01/10, Deborah wrote:
    >>>>> Sharon,
    >>>>> Did I mention that I'd finally had a response from Daniel Becnel,
    >>>>> the attorney? He stated, unequivocally, that the Mike Becnel I
    >>>>> leased an apartment from was not his brother, that he had no idea
    >>>>> who he was and had never met him.
    >>>>> This is odd because the Mike Becnel that was my landlord tried to
    >>>>> get me to believe Daniel, or "Danny", as he referred to him, was
    >>>>> his relative. Several attorneys made that assumption, too.
    >>>>> Perhaps ol' Mike B was just "spinning" things to intimidate any
    >>>>> potential ally I might find. Hmmm. Thanks for reminding me of
    >>>>> that. I might have to contact an attorney after all.
    >>>>> Thanks, Sharon, it does seem Mike B joined here for the sole
    >>>>> purpose of harassing me. "It" refers to discussions it was
    >>>> having
    >>>>> w/ you. Did I miss that? I saw no discussion, only sophomoric
    >>>>> and ad hominem attacks whenever you post, especially updates on
    >>>>> your case.
    >>>>> On 10/01/10, Sharon wrote:
    >>>>>> Enough, Mike B. It is no secret you started posting on this
    >>>>>> board, not because you care of environmental issues, but
    >>>>>> because you have been Hell bent to harass Deborah.
    >>>>>> You have gone beyond poor taste. Stop.
    >>>>>> On 10/01/10, Mike B. wrote:
    >>>>>>> Listen closely Deborah - until you called me a "tool", I was
    >>>>>>> happy to ignore your tasteless and malicious attacks on me
    >>>>>>> throughout my discussions with Sharon Kramer.
    >>>>>>> Your history and lifestyle around these parts is well known.
    >>>>>>> Being called a "homewrecker" is the least of your problems.
    >>>>>>> Whatever psudo-lawyer you've been able to consult will soon
    >>>>>>> learn you're the offensive lump in the punch bowl.
    >>>>>>> BTW - my wife couldn't care less about you. She, too, knows
    >>>>>>> your true background and what you haven't "shared" with the
    >>>>>>> people on this and other sites.
    >>>>>>> On 9/30/10, Deborah wrote:
    >>>>>>>> Well, Mike B., guess that is libel. Isn't it? Or at least
    >>>>>>>> an attempt at it. Like I said, I am still waiting for you
    >>>>>>>> to give details on this.
    >>>>>>>> You are a piece of work, aren't you?
    >>>>>>>> This is a board to discuss mold litigation and tangential,
    >>>>>>>> relevant issues. How is your attempt at libeling me
    >>>>>>>> relevant here? More importantly, how is ANYTHING you post
    >>>>>>>> here relevant?

    Posts on this thread, including this one

  Site Map:  Home Chatboards Legal Jobs Classified Ads Search Contacts Advertise
  © 1996 - 2013. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.