Though

he puts a distorting spin worthy of Bill Clinton

on his statement about dismissing the libel

lawsuit against The Citizen, former Peachtree

City Attorney Jim Webb basically admits what was

evident from the start: He has no case.

Mr.

Webb said to my face that he miscalculated in

filing the suit against the paper, me and letter

writer Steve Brown. Webb said he thought the suit

would stop us publishing articles and letters

unfavorable to him and his law firm. Obviously,

his intimidation tactics failed.

In

his statement he attributes the whole controversy

to a "plot" motivated by "ulterior

motives and political aspirations." While

there may be all sorts of plots and political

motivations out there, The Citizen and I were not

party to any of them.

We

simply published some letters to the editor about

the appearance of a conflict of interest

involving City Attorney Jim Webb and his foray

into the banking business with local developers

who either had sued or were in the process of

suing the very city Webb was supposed to be

defending.

Had

Webb so chosen, we would have published any

letters written by Webb explaining or defending

his choices. He chose instead to attack with a

lawsuit, which his partner Rick Lindsey promised

would be long and expensive. In doing so, Webb

attacked one of this country's fundamental

freedoms embodied in the First Amendment to the

U.S. Constitution.

His

attack was doomed to fail, as he should have

known from the beginning. But he and his law firm

- who make their living by suing people

- decided to punish the letter writer and

this paper for daring to question the propriety

of this public official's actions in regard to a

public matter.

They

intended to make us pay for expensive attorneys

to defend our basic right to freedom of the press

and freedom of expression contained in an opinion

in a letter from a private citizen about the

operation of his city government.

So

far Webb's calculated attack on freedom has cost

this paper and its insurance carrier more than

$6,000, and has cost Brown an unknown amount.

What

Mr. Webb's statement, published elsewhere in this

issue in its entirety, fails to mention is that

this paper has filed a countersuit against Webb

and his law firm for engaging in abusive

litigation. Our countersuit charges Webb and firm

employed what is called a slap suit to deter us

from exercising our First Amendment rights. We

are currently considering whether to continue

that counterclaim to compel Webb and his firm to

pay for our attorneys' fees and damages. That

decision will be made in the next several days.

In

his statement, Webb never addresses the central

issue: The propriety of his starting a business

with developers who have sued or are suing Webb's

client at the time, Peachtree City.

note that Webb decided to dismiss his lawsuit

within days of our putting him and his partners

under oath in scheduled depositions in connection

with this suit. The dismissal also comes just

days after we filed open records requests with

Peachtree City, the state Insurance and Banking

Board and law enforcement agencies concerning

past investigations into Webb's business

practices.

If

I could draw any conclusions, I would say that

Webb and firm are trying to get out while the

getting is good. - Cal Beverly

<!--

-----------