terpening lawyer calls web site writer
This writer was shocked Friday afternoon when the call came in. First missing the call, I saw the 269 area code and assumed it was one of the folks helping with this website calling from a phone not programmed into my phone. I returned the call without checking voicemail and was dumbfounded to hear the woman answer the phone with some name I missed then, "law office." I asked her to repeat what she said and I missed it, again, but gave her my name and she put me right through to Mr. Terpening's lawyer.
In fairness I am not going to name the lawyer or get into specific details of what was discussed in the 18 minute phone call. I did not think to say the call was on the record, and while this website is not bound by traditional media rules, we do want to be fair.
The call was friendly and was, in no way, unprofessional and was in no way threatening. The call stood out against the nearly two months of abuse heaped on this website and its writer for its professional, friendly and genial tone.
What I will say is Terpening's counsel mentioned something, very important, this writer strongly believes. What happens outside the court will have no impact inside the court, and while Terpening's lawyer presented that theory with far more classy words, it is something one would hope Mr. Terpening and his Followers would also take to heart.
Just yesterday, Follower Katie Rucinski put forward she knows we are trying to get information out of her. The simple fact is no one has the smoking gun unless, as the recanting witness suggests, there is DNA evidence in the case because Mike left it behind, thus backing up what the victims in the case have alleged. Both sides are required to disclose their evidence to one another, for the two sides in the case there will be no Matlock moment of surprise for anyone other than the public will not have the information until trial.
The truth is good lawyering is always best for a defendant, and good lawyering is always good for justice. The State of Michigan is obligated to prove these allegations beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not the obligation of the defendant to prove innocence. Terpening does not have to call one witness if he and his team feel they've taken apart the state's case using their own witnesses.
18 minutes is not enough to trust years of my freedom to, but one of his lawyers is an honest man who respects the law and understands what the Followers do not, this case will be resolved before a jury of Terpening's peers; not a bunch of troubled people troubling the rest of us.
The objectives of this website has been to expose truth as Followers have misled the public and work to get victim names removed from the web when the Followers have used victim names to punish then on the web for speaking out. That point was made clear to Mike's counsel.