In article >,
"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:

> Chester wrote:
>
> > see you in court Bobby
>
> When and where, Chester? You keep spouting off that bullshit, but if you
> REALLY had an attorney you surely would have disclosed who that attorney is.
> What possible reason could there be for failing to disclose that
> information? It cannot be at the advice of said attorney, because no
> attorney would give such horrible and bad-for-business advice. See,
> attorneys work for money. And the more people who know about their services,
> the more potential clients they'll have, and the more money they can charge
> each client. So it would be crazy for an attorney to tell you *not* to
> broadcast his or her firm's name far and wide.

It's really quite simple, Bob. Now, I'm just speculating (as are you),
since we don't really know. But Stu has a really big mouth. By his own
admission, his lawyer has told him to stop posting here, as it
potentially provides ammunition against him. That's very standard
advice, which Stu has admitted not following. If *I* was Stu's lawyer,
I would tell him not to post anything at all about the case or anything
remotely related to it.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA