This site actually adds a lot of info, since it has a working link to a PDF of the suit (although a number of pages are missing). It does read very damagingly to Cochran, but then it is one side's legal filing, and it would read that way even if nothing in it were true. There are also some holes and puzzling places in its argument that I would need explained before I passed judgment on Cochran from this.
Of the names in the comments field, I recognize two: one famous author (Charles de Lint) and one old fannish acquaintance I haven't seen in years. Both write as outside supporters, with no particular knowledge, as do most of the rest.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2016-01-07 03:41 am (UTC)Of the names in the comments field, I recognize two: one famous author (Charles de Lint) and one old fannish acquaintance I haven't seen in years. Both write as outside supporters, with no particular knowledge, as do most of the rest.