Having gone through a SLAPP suit in RI, I can state unequivocally that the RI Judiciary is absolutely CLUELESS.

In point of fact, “Justice” Thunberg, was one of the judges in my SLAPP-Back suit, so I am writing with some authority.

The RIGL pertaining to SLAPP suits is very clear, ands states in part: “The legislature finds and declares that full participation by persons and organizations and robust discussion of issues of public concern before the legislative, judicial, and administrative bodies and in other public fora are essential to the democratic process, that there has been a disturbing increase in lawsuits brought primarily to chill the valid exercise of the constitutional rights of freedom of speech and petition for the redress of grievances; that such litigation is disfavored and should be resolved quickly with minimum cost to citizens who have participated in matters of public concern.”

That being said, the RI Judiciary seems to ignore the last statement and often drags out the proceedings at a great cost to the defendant. In our case, total costs approached $100,000!!!!

Most members of the RI Judiciary don’t really take into consideration the costs involved as they are receiving their $140,000 + salary in any case.

I have not doubt that Mr. Nelson will prevail.

That said, I would encourage him to file a Countersuit or SLAPP-Back action at this juncture in order to preserve his right to obtain punitive damages.

Monique has my e-mail address if you wish me to provide further information.

"It is simply beyond debate that Durfee and Arruda worked "to avoid a Town Council vote.""

Indeed, avoiding a Town Council vote was, in fact, the central goal of the extensive maneuvering and machinations of these council members. They wanted a tax increase but didn't want to get tagged with it. Such profiles in courage.

Monique, how are you so clear on the intentions of other people? Are you familiar with all the players here in
Tiverton or are you just defending Justin and his allies.

This can only be seen as further evidence that RI is now, effectively, a Latin American country, with the same legal protections and justice system that we have seen over the years in countless tinpot dictatorships.

Anybody with an ounce of sense and the means to do so should leave this rapidly sinking ship.

I'd say both the article and Justin's analysis are way too fast to skip over the threshhold issue, which is that the documentation submitted to the state *was* false in both its actual content and in the larger context. It is not impossible to prove the accuracy of what Mr. Nelson claimed because the documents speak for themselves. They weren't the Budget Committee's numbers. They weren't what was published as official notice to the people. They bore the name but not the signature or knowledge of the Town Council President. The Town Administrator tried to keep them secret in a file labeled "fake". Several town officials protested what was being attempted. So Mr. Nelson will likely prevail without even seeking to discover what was in his head because the documents were false and several town officials said so; his statements were therefore accurate, and truth is a complete defense to defamation claims. This case is exactly the type of abuse that the anti-SLAPP statute is meant to address.

Rob could you please provide us with the names of those officials who protested and what evidence is their that the file said fake. Fake would be like publishing one copy of a document and then trying to shove the another one in front of people who had never had a chance to review it.

Rob could you please provide us with the names of those officials who protested and what evidence is their that the file said fake. Fake would be like publishing one copy of a document and then trying to shove the another one in front of people who had never had a chance to review it.