Yes, dear, but Dominick Dunne writes for a major publication and has deep pockets (which makes it a better bet). This is not a major publication; we are incapable of damaging DP's reputation. Again, he has to prove real damages. Not hurt feelings. It doesn't work that way. Bringing a costly lawsuit against people whose pockets aren't deep is risky. You may never, ever recoup the cost of legal bills.
It would simply be silly and financially damaging to bring a lawsuit against a peon on an internet chatboard. Besides, I'm not sure if setting up an internet begging site for cash would work a second time.
If I were DP I'd be more worried about the slanderous and very public things I've said about the entire Savio and Cales families, and the pastor. Now those remarks were damaging, as they were stated on NATIONAL TELEVISION, as fact.
Yes I remember reading somewhere it was neighbor Sharon who said that SS, not the media. The media as I recall when mentioning the 'hits' at the house were only the bedroom and at the garage door.
IMO Brodsky is trying to throw mud and make it look like someone else is a suspect. Brodsky said that there was a "Mr. Cales" that was now in jail as a sex offender. Brodsky felt he should be looked at because he was the person that Stacey was meeting that day to paint with. Brosky never said this was Stacey's brother. Pam, the family spokesperson, was the one that said that Yelstin being a sex offender had no relevence to Stacey missing at all. She wanted to know why Brodsky would make that comment when he represented someone who dated and married 16 year olds when he was 46 year old. She stated in her opinion DP was a sex offender. I don't remember Yelstin being the person Stacey was meeting to paint with. I thought it was Cassandra's boyfriend. Methinks Brodsky is mixing up his stories in an effort to make someone else look like they had a motive or could possibly be a suspect. Lame try IMO
