­

Russ Whitney gets yet another delay Russ Whitney and his corporation Whitney Information Network, Inc. were supposed to answer my interrogatories under oath on June 13, 2005. I figure they will never answer those interrogatories. Instead of answering, they asked the court to delay the deadline until June 27, 2005. The court granted the postponement. I do not believe they will answer the interrogatories then either. Read them and you"ll see why. Mind you, the U.S. District Court has ordered them to answer the questions. So how, you may wonder, can they avoid answering? Well, so far, they have avoided answering by a series of motions that had the effect of delaying. You can read about them at "¢ https://www.johntreed.com/Whitneycontinuance.html "¢' www.johntreed.com/Whitneycontinue2.html "¢ https://www.johntreed.com/Whitneydelay.html "¢ https://www.johntreed.com/Whitneydelay2.html "¢ https://www.johntreed.com/Whitneydelay3.html "¢' www.johntreed.com/Whitneydelay5.html I expect they will either file yet another delaying motion, or they will provide non-responsive answers. For example, the first interrogatoriy to Russ Whitney is "Have you ever killed anyone?" If the answer is no, I expect he will just answer no. But I would not have asked it if I knew the answer was no. And I don"t know why Whitney would have delayed answering twice if the answer was no. So I expect they will try to get by with some answer like, "I have never been convicted of killing anyone." Didn"t ask if you had been convicted. Only if you killed

 someone. That particular technique of answering"”or not answering"” questions is called a negative pregnant. During the Watergate scandal, reporters called it a non-denial denial. The answerer does not want to answer the question that was asked, so he phrases his answer as if he had been asked another question that he can answer comfortably. It' dishonest. The answerer tries to make it sound like he is answering the question that was asked, but he' really ducking the question that was asked because answering it would reveal what a scum bag he is. Instead, he is asnwering a different question that fails to revela his scumbagness. Whatever Russ Whitney answers, you can be sure you will read his answers and my comments about them right here at https://www.johntreed.com. Some have likened this to a soap opera. "As the Whitney Turns?" "All My Gurus?" "Days of our Lies?" "288,000 Lives to Screw Up?" So cast your votes. Which do you think they will do on June 27th? 1. file for another delay A. by citing Rothstein' illness for a fourth time B. by reopening the issue of whether they should have to answer the questions C. by claiming some other Rothstein lawyer has a family illness or scheduling conflict D.' by claiming Russ Whitney has an illness or other emergency 2. provide unresponsive answers You can send your vote to me at www.johntreed.com John T. Reed Copyright 2005 by John T. Reed John T. Reed, a.k.a. John Reed, Jack Reed, 342 Bryan Drive, Alamo, CA 94507, Voice: 925-820-7262, Fax: 925-820-1259, www.johntreed.com

Log in to comment
­