For the recordZZZZZJJJJJJ

ChuckSlusarczyk wrote:

For those who have been following the conn case. Here's the latest from the
court concerning the case. It says what I've been saying all along that I was
not responsible personally for conns deposit to the old company. Just more
"proof positive" that zoom and jaun are not credible sources of info. conn has
14 days to respond so I'm just gonna cool my heels and eat turkey and drink a
little ML. I'll post any new news.

Still putting my ducks in a row.

See ya

Chuck S RAH-15/1 ret

"credibility it was always about credibility" chuck s

Thanks for the update. I didn't realize that this one had reared again.
Does this mean he can't find anybody else (S'NF aside) to try to ****
on? I really do have to hit the archives and catch up.

B.S.

"Ben Sego" wrote in message
...

Thanks for the update. I didn't realize that this one had reared again.
Does this mean he can't find anybody else (S'NF aside) to try to ****
on? I really do have to hit the archives and catch up.

And now Sun-n-Fun wants to expand to be a year-round draw. Wonder what
Zoom's response will be. Here's the story from the Orlando Sentinal:

Aviation fans want to expand in Polk

By Christopher Sherman | Sentinel Staff Writer
Posted November 23, 2003


Organizers of Polk County's Sun 'n Fun Experimental Aircraft Association
Fly-In want to make that aviation event the best in the world and capitalize
on the fly-in's fame to attract visitors to the group's other programs
throughout the year.

In its nearly three decades, the fly-in at Lakeland Linder Regional Airport
has grown in size and reputation, offering aviation fans and newcomers a
chance to buy, sell, study or just look at a variety of aircraft. A recent
University of South Florida-Lakeland study put its annual economic impact at
$27.4 million and suggested it still has plenty of room to grow.

"We want to be the aviation event of choice in the world," said John Burton,
Sun 'n Fun Inc. president. "If we strive to offer the best, the numbers will
take care of themselves."

Those attendance numbers have been the subject of debate in recent years,
spurring Sun 'n Fun to commission the study in search of credible figures.

Investigators estimated last year's fly-in had 57,000 visitors, many of whom
visited more than once and boosted the count of people passing through the
gates to 160,000.

The attendance figures were a launching pad for the real question of
economic impact for the seven-day event that draws pilots, vendors and the
curious.

The best way to capitalize on an event with that kind of name recognition
and drawing power is to try to extend its benefits beyond just a week every
spring, the study concluded.

"When you do something that has a $27 million impact [in Polk County], that
is huge," said Jack Walters, director of the school's College of Business
Administration, who led the study. "They would like to develop a larger
calendar of events throughout the year to leverage the high visibility of
the event."

That is in line with Sun 'n Fun's strategic plan, Burton said.

Sun 'n Fun recognized years ago that it was not using all of its assets by
hosting an event only one week out of the year, said Burton, who was hired
to expand the organization from the fly-in to a year-round operation.

The organization is expanding the fly-in's core with year-round workshops
and seminars, and by providing outreach programs to the public.

A monthly Aviation Expressions lecture series during the fall and winter is
drawing a good crowd as well, Burton said.

Christopher Sherman can be reached at or
863-422-3395.

On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 18:28:59 GMT, "Gerry Caron" wrote:

"Ben Sego" wrote in message
...

Thanks for the update. I didn't realize that this one had reared again.
Does this mean he can't find anybody else (S'NF aside) to try to ****
on? I really do have to hit the archives and catch up.

Conceivably, he could amend his current SnF case to include his old
"conspiracy to defame" chestnut, and again name a batch of random
co-defendants, a'la his RAH-15 countersuit.

And now Sun-n-Fun wants to expand to be a year-round draw. Wonder what
Zoom's response will be. Here's the story from the Orlando Sentinal:

Stuff like this could be why Zoom finally hit SnF with a second suit...too
many aviation events are taking advantage of the SnF facility, and he's
thus banned from all of them.

After the initial flurry of activity on his current suit, the Polk County
Clerk web page hasn't shown any activity on that case in the last two
months. It looks to me that SnF has yet to file a response to Campbell's
interrogatories. This may mean SnF just has the case on a back burner, but
it may indicate there's some negotiations going on for an out-of-court
settlement.

Campbell would probably settle for the right to be re-admitted to SnF. It
would probably be the most cost-effective way for SnF to settle this case.
But then, they'd probably have to go through the whole process again in a
couple of years....

Ron Wanttaja

In article , Ron Wanttaja says...
Campbell would probably settle for the right to be re-admitted to SnF. It
would probably be the most cost-effective way for SnF to settle this case.
But then, they'd probably have to go through the whole process again in a
couple of years....

I'd sure be disappointed if they settle with him.It will only be a matter of
time before he acts up again.

See ya

Chuck S RAH-15/1 ret

ChuckSlusarczyk wrote in message ...
In article , Ron Wanttaja says...
Campbell would probably settle for the right to be re-admitted to SnF. It
would probably be the most cost-effective way for SnF to settle this case.
But then, they'd probably have to go through the whole process again in a
couple of years....

I'd sure be disappointed if they settle with him.It will only be a matter of
time before he acts up again.

See ya

Chuck S RAH-15/1 ret
================================================== ==============================

Chuck;

You are correct leopards don't change their spots,and neither will
zzzzoom. After all the hassles the he put me through I also hope that
SnF doesn't settle it is a better show without him.A settlement would
only strenthen his position and do nothing else.
Frank;

Ron Wanttaja wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 18:28:59 GMT, "Gerry Caron" wrote:


"Ben Sego" wrote in message
...

Thanks for the update. I didn't realize that this one had reared again.
Does this mean he can't find anybody else (S'NF aside) to try to ****
on? I really do have to hit the archives and catch up.


Conceivably, he could amend his current SnF case to include his old
"conspiracy to defame" chestnut, and again name a batch of random
co-defendants, a'la his RAH-15 countersuit.

Good God. I suppose it could happen. Does he really have nothing else
to do? You'd think someone of his stature, esteem, and past
accomplishments would be engaged in more fruitful pursuits. Perhaps the
furtherance of his aeronautical, literary, and medical pursuits.



And now Sun-n-Fun wants to expand to be a year-round draw. Wonder what
Zoom's response will be. Here's the story from the Orlando Sentinal:


Stuff like this could be why Zoom finally hit SnF with a second suit...too
many aviation events are taking advantage of the SnF facility, and he's
thus banned from all of them.

Still, this baffles me. Why go to the trouble of another suit? As
things stand, he can "report" whatever he wants. It's not as though
actual attendance would further inform his writing, is it? When you
have such a highly polished way with words, what would the encumberance
of facts contribute?

After the initial flurry of activity on his current suit, the Polk County
Clerk web page hasn't shown any activity on that case in the last two
months. It looks to me that SnF has yet to file a response to Campbell's
interrogatories. This may mean SnF just has the case on a back burner, but
it may indicate there's some negotiations going on for an out-of-court
settlement.

Campbell would probably settle for the right to be re-admitted to SnF. It
would probably be the most cost-effective way for SnF to settle this case.
But then, they'd probably have to go through the whole process again in a
couple of years....

Ron Wanttaja

Sounds like settlement to me. When dealing with meaningful disputes
between rational actors, settlement is a wise course.

How that applies here..., well, you do the math.

B.S.

On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 05:25:13 GMT, Ben Sego wrote:

Ron Wanttaja wrote:

Conceivably, he could amend his current SnF case to include his old
"conspiracy to defame" chestnut, and again name a batch of random
co-defendants, a'la his RAH-15 countersuit.

Good God. I suppose it could happen. Does he really have nothing else
to do? You'd think someone of his stature, esteem, and past
accomplishments would be engaged in more fruitful pursuits. Perhaps the
furtherance of his aeronautical, literary, and medical pursuits.

There are a number of possibilities. He could do it just to try to gum-up
SnF's legal team....Tony once told me that Zoom's attorney had privately
implied that the only reason for the RAH-15 suit was to increase Tony's
workload. Or, some of Campbell's ex-employees and associates describe him
as vengeful; filing lawsuits would just be another form of harassment.
Campbell has already sued at least five former employees, editors, or
writers.

Another possibility would be to establish a "history" to use against that
person should they ever testify against Zoom in another case. For
instance, why was Nauga Hyde one of the RAH-15? It would have been because
flight testing is his profession, and he'd already publicly pointed out
that one of Zoom's claims was not realistic. Vern Barr was probably named
because he was a former associate editor, Al Staats because he was a former
marketing manager. By naming them in a suit, Campbell had an argument
ready if any of these people testified as experts in any case against
Campbell ("They're not unbiased experts!").

One interesting bit of speculation regards Zoom's financial relationship
with the lawyer for SnF #2. Did the attorney take the case on a
contingency basis (he apparently specializes in civil-rights cases) or is
Campbell being billed for services rendered?

If the attorney is working on contingency, naming additional co-defendants
would significantly increase his workload but the amount of any potential
settlement would probably be about the same. If he's billing Campbell for
his time, you have to wonder how much of a 'war chest' Zoom has. As I
mentioned years ago on the RAH-15 case, just taking depositions from all 15
co-defendants would probably have added $50,000 or more to his legal bill.

And now Sun-n-Fun wants to expand to be a year-round draw. Wonder what
Zoom's response will be. Here's the story from the Orlando Sentinal:


Stuff like this could be why Zoom finally hit SnF with a second suit...too
many aviation events are taking advantage of the SnF facility, and he's
thus banned from all of them.

Still, this baffles me. Why go to the trouble of another suit? As
things stand, he can "report" whatever he wants. It's not as though
actual attendance would further inform his writing, is it? When you
have such a highly polished way with words, what would the encumberance
of facts contribute?

There are three basic reasons one might file a lawsuit.

1. To obtain regress for valid damages
2. To harass the defendant in order to force them to take a certain action
3. To gain publicity or sympathy

Number 3 seems to be right out, since Zoom apparently hasn't mentioned this
on his own web page. So we're left with #1 and #2.

Ron Wanttaja

Has anybody considered the possibility of filing a SLAPP suit against his
news service.......
I was under the impression that strategic litigation against private parties
was
illegal and the little guys had recourse from harassment suits brought by
businesses to silence them as critics or outspoken individuals....

Scott

In article , Scott Correa says...

Has anybody considered the possibility of filing a SLAPP suit against his
news service.......
I was under the impression that strategic litigation against private parties
was
illegal and the little guys had recourse from harassment suits brought by
businesses to silence them as critics or outspoken individuals....

Scott

Hmmm,seems like it might be a duck trying to find a row...That's in code
son...if you know what I mean.....

Seriously there are two problems with trying to sue zoom et al .First he 's poor
and has no assets.Secondly it costs money to bring suit. However someone may be
willing to sue his butt for principle not money and secondly maybe a fund could
be established as a pool for funds so that one person could bring the law suit
and the fund could help support it.Sort of a reverse "defense
fund" I just don't know if it's legal to do it that way or not but I'll check.

Chuck RAH-15/1 ret

"first you line your Ducks up, then ya count 'em, then..."

Ron Wanttaja wrote:

There are three basic reasons one might file a lawsuit.

1. To obtain regress for valid damages
2. To harass the defendant in order to force them to take a certain action
3. To gain publicity or sympathy

Number 3 seems to be right out, since Zoom apparently hasn't mentioned this
on his own web page. So we're left with #1 and #2.

You neglected to mention a fourth possibility:
4. The plaintiff is unreasonable (i.e. does not have a "basic reason [to] file a
lawsuit.").

Russell Kent