• Random House sued ME; not the other way around.
  • Random House filed suit to silence the facts I was posting on the web.
  • There has been NO trial on the facts, only the Random House effort to prevent a trial.
  • NO expert testimony was allowed despite three international plagiarism experts who were willing to testif that it existed.
  • The only sworn statements made under penalty of perjury are affidavits from me and my experts, nothing from RH.
  • The judge refused to consider any expert analysis.
  • Despite suing me first, Random House & Sony UNsuccessfully demanded that I pay the $310,000 in legal fees they spent to sue me.
  • Contrary to the Random House spin, I am not alleging plagiarism of general issues, but of several hundred very specific ones.
  • This is not about money. Anything I win goes to charity.

Legal filings and the expert witness reports are HERE

I have a second blog, Writopia
which focuses on Dan Brown's pattern of falsehoods
and embellishment of his personal achievements.

Saturday, February 18, 2006

How Lawyer Manipulation of the Court Process Can Thwart Justice

At The Da Vinci Legacy website, I have just posted my reply, to the Random House Response,to my Appeals Brief.

As I was doing so, I ran across one of my attorneys' explanation as to why we were not able to reply to ALL of the issues in the Random House brief.

"By way of explanation, there is a 7,000 word limit." He explained.

Thus, here is a classic example of how lawyering can bias the process: Random House threw in every possible issue they could -- even when we had already responded to those issues in the trial briefs and even when out responses clearly showed that they had intentionally misrepresented the facts.

But because there is a limit on the size of our reply, we were unable to respond to every issue raised and were not allowed to address any issue to its appropriate extent.

So despite the fact that my affidavits and declarations are the only SWORN testimony in the entire proceeding, the manipulation of the process prevented us from making a full and complete reply. This is yet another way that justice can be thwarted by "good lawyering."

Sure, it's legal, but it's also sleazy and thwarts the even-handed administration of justice. But attorneys for Random House and Sony have been doing that all along, so it's not surprising.

As we have seen, they both realize that they cannot win on the facts. Thus they must do everything possible to prevent a trial.


Blogger Mark said...

Why were you subjected to this limit and not them?

Sat Feb 18, 12:30:00 PM PST  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

There are different limits on each level of filing and this one has a shorted limit than the previous level... thus it is easy to "game" the system.

Sat Feb 18, 01:21:00 PM PST  
Blogger Mark said...

I ran into this bio of Brown yesterday.


Don't know what revalations it contains, if any.

Sun Feb 19, 09:29:00 AM PST  
Blogger Mark said...

The appeal brief looks good to this law student. The next novel. Yeah that's where I am. The first novel. I can't say that I'm very good at it, at least not yet. Still sending out two nonfiction works to agents and small publishers. Playing the game.

Sun Feb 19, 10:18:00 AM PST  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Some deleted posts ...

I had some posts here (quite lengthy) about another infringement case involving writer Dahlia Gal.

I was doing research and planning to elevate it to a post of its own.

But after reviewing the case documents, my attorneys say there is no relevance to my case.

They said they had been tracking the case from the beginning and had already dismissed it as not worth their time.

So, -- likewise -- rather than waste time on something off-topic like that, I've deleted those comments so we can stay on topic here (Lawyer Manipulation of the system).

Thu Feb 23, 10:57:00 AM PST  
Blogger danni said...

Check out this funny website, it has an interesting take on the Da Vinci code trial.

Mon Feb 27, 03:22:00 AM PST  

Post a Comment

<< Home