Charles Peter Hackett’s sworn affadavit
Breakdown of comments:
- I have evidenced in a previous post the first 2 lies.
- He calls Mari Gilbert a liar.
- He adds, “I never had any conversation whatsoever with anyone.” This phrasing is specific to further a lie.
- Again, he uses the phrase, “I never met nor had any contact whatsoever with Shannan.”
13-16: “Since I never Met Shannan Gilbert… she was never in my presence nor in my home“, “Since I never met nor was in the physical presence of Shannan Gilbert,” “Since I never met nor was ever in the presence of Shannan Gilbert,”
- There is a change in the phrasing that is rather telling if you know what you’re looking at. He changes the phrasing of the wording of presence. The addition of the word “never” is designed to get the reader to put emphasis on it as fact and in some psychological way, it shows the author is trying to convince himself it is fact, as well. He obviously didn’t have his lawyer draft this on his behalf, and that gives us another insight on his psychology- he thinks he’s smarter than his lawyer and needs to be in control. Most people would have one sentence in place of the tired phrasing trying to convince himself and the reader.
18: “Sadly, the complaint…” “…I was never in her presence, never met her, she was never in my house and I did not cause her death.”
- The first word, sadly, is about himself. It’s the fact that here he is, being asked to explain himself, and he finds that sad. He now removes Shannan Gilbert’s name with the less personal “her” in his last attempt to convince himself and the reader that he has nothing to do with anything.
19: “I never attempted to conceal the body of Shannan Gilbert as I never met nor was in the presence of Shannan Gilbert nor observed, concealed, or moved her body!”
- Wow! He uses an exclamation point on this statement. He’s now yelling at the reader. In case you didn’t get it from 13-19, he “never met nor was in the presence of Shannan Gilbert”. This exclamation shows his obvious frustration.
21: “The events complained of took place in May 2010!”
- Here’s another aggravated statement pointed out by an exclamation point. Yes, it is known the events took place in May 2010, but Mari Gilbert filed within the statute of limitations, so it holds NO bearing on any point Hackett is trying to make.
- Underlines the word never, again, to convince the reader (and himself).
- “The so called loss…” wow, just wow.
- “The so called negligent acts…”
- 22(D): apparently the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Causes of action are not “so called“.
- “…I have never had any contact whatsoever with Shannan Gilbert.” More words to reiterate lies.
Lisa G. Newman
Notary Public State of NY
widow of Michael Newman (2008)
Barbara Hackett’s sworn affadavit
Caroline Hackett’s sworn affadavit
Michael Dougherty’s interview with the Hackett family
Hackett is well aware that I have had these documents for some time now, and he knows that I have evidenced his lies. I wonder what new lies he will come up with next…
UPDATE: April 26, 2013, 12:40 pm
Since I’m being called a liar AGAIN, I will show some of the exhibits in support of John Ray’s rebuttal to dismiss. I was given the file by John Ray, not JS as is the latest misinformation being put out. I have it all, but I’m not showing it all.