Legal Magazine

Media Coverage Continues to Expand on Legal Schnauzer First Amendment Case

Posted on the 02 December 2013 by Rogershuler @RogerShuler
This is Carol, Roger's wife. We are pleased to report that media coverage of the Legal Schnauzer first amendment case continues to expand. One of the more interesting articles of late was featured on Nov. 11 in the WhoWhatWhy website and was written by David J. Krajicek. 

Here is the link to the article: Gulag Justice? Alabama Blogger Jailed in Secretive Scandal

First off, I want to say that the article was very well done and I very much appreciate all the hard work and effort that went into writing it. However, there was one important statement that was so grossly incorrect that I simply must clear it up. 

"Carol Shuler said their inability to afford a lawyer was one factor in her husband’s avoidance of court paper service."
After the article came out and I read the above erroneous statement, I immediately emailed Mr. Krajicek with the following clarification: 
"For the record, I never said or certainly never meant to imply that our inability to afford a lawyer was any factor in anything, much less avoidance of service. In fact we were not AVOIDING SERVICE at all. The fact of the matter is we had absolutely no clue why 2-3 sheriff's deputies were coming to our home twice a day for a week acting like we were on America's Most Wanted list. We had no way of knowing and in fact, did not know that it had anything to do with the serving of court papers in a civil case. As I said they were acting like they were trying to bust a meth lab or nab a serial killer. Scared us to death! We knew it was likely some trumped up bogus crap possibly to arrest one of us for some made-up charge or to ransack our home with a search warrant and maybe seize our computer for no legitimate reason purely for harassment and intimidation.
So to be clear.... I never said we were avoiding anything. We simply did not answer the door to jackbooted thugs gone wild. If they had not acted so threatening and bizarre and there had only been one deputy and one vehicle...instead of 2 or 3... we quite likely would have answered the door. Also when it is civil service, they will typically leave a card on your door saying they have court papers for you. But they did not do that at any time. So again, it felt very threatening and intimidating and harassing and that was their intent to be sure."   
Media Coverage Continues to Expand on Legal Schnauzer First Amendment Case

Back to Featured Articles on Logo Paperblog