Why it is wrong to say someone lied through hearsay

Lisa Renee, in the comments on her post about the PIO postings, made an interesting leap that I was saying two stories to her and the media based on very shaky reasonings. She went and posted on her blog some of the tidbits of information on the conversation I had with her but the interesting thing was the timing. Only an hour after I taped the interview on 13abc, Lisa made the pronouncement that I changed my story, which was really strange since she was not there and she said it before the broadcast. Lisa says that I told her that I denied that someone shopped the story to me which is true, it did not happen, yet she refuses to say how I specifically lied on the 13abc story because what they broadcast did not prove that and when asked specifically how I obtained it, I declined to answer it. There was a third person listening in on the whole interview who is not a journalist and I am sure that she talked to that person to see what I said, basically getting the questions and answers from hearsay.

I have been quite aware of what I was asked and how I replied, but Lisa has not heard every question and every response and in this particular incident she was not even there. What 13abc decided to broadcast was very conservative and we did have a much longer conversation. I am sure that the 13abc reporter Christine Long would verify that I did not change my story, and given she has given many interviews could have provided insight on how my responses stacked up on the truthfulness meter but being that I am sure she did not get the questions and responses from her, is one reason why she thinks I told a different story. The 13abc interview was one of the best interviews I have ever done, which is why it was wrong for Lisa to say I switched stories there because I was very comfortable in what was said and I think that Ms. Long would verify that in how I responded because she was able to see my reactions and compare them to others. But I would not go out and make a pronouncement on my blog that someone lied without proving it. I would always cite specifically where the difference occurred by pointing to posts or video. I asked her to either prove it or retract it, she refused to prove it so I wanted to clarify here why I think it was wrong for her to say that.

I have been asked how I obtained them 3 ways:
How did you obtain them? I heard about them from a source then I was able to obtain them.
Was it from one of Jason's friends? I have consistently refused to comment on this question. I did speculate that it could have originated from one of his friends.
Did someone shop the story/postings to you? I have consistently said no. Lisa asked this question and I have stated my answer.

Anyone in the media who asked me these questions can confirm that those are the questions and the answers. Different media members asked me different questions, but those were the three angles and my answers. I have remained consistent on all of them contrary to what Lisa is claiming.

I do believe that Lisa had made a decision that she knows how I came about it and that decision has created a filter on what she is observing and perceiving. I am quite sure that Lisa does not know how the posts came about so her hypothesis is only speculation. But it was wrong for someone to say before something airs that I changed my story when that she was not there.

You can be assured that I only wait to have actual citations to show someone lied before I go on this blog and say such a thing.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

I am quite sure that Lisa does not know how the posts came about

Which is probably driving Lisa Renee right out of her mind, hence the personal attack. You have to understand that Lisa Renee's blog is part conspiracy theory, part Toledo Tattler and about one-half high school society clique.

Don't take it too seriously.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.