In her newspaper column on Thursday, Mrs. Crawford-Hall essentially said, "It's not over."
"I can't say that anyone was terribly surprised at the outcome of this first phase of the pursuit of legitimacy," wrote Mrs. Crawford-Hall, who attended almost every day of the proceedings. "It seemed fairly evident even before the trial began that the court was not inclined to give much credence to the Pappas attorneys, while all manner of latitude was afforded the opposition.
It was a bit mind-boggling to see the group of people whose names you knew but weren't aware of, just how cozy they all were. I guess it should not be a surprise as this election effort has been perfected probably by the same group over many years."
She added that it was good to see that the "same script has been followed and now that that has been discovered, future litigation will have an easier time to expose it."
Does this mean this spurious litigation is not settled? or does it mean we should assume any election that involves UCSB and Isla Vista will be targeted by Ms. Crawfor-Hall? Did she think she set some sort of precedent? What a waste of money on her part. It's nice some people have money to burn in a recession but the public suffers too as there are definitely costs associated with the defense.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder