◆ SpookStack

@,..With the publicity, appellate courts are reluctant ta feverse because it would bring dom a heap of critictas fros the public who are not faniltar with the rule and regulation of law...to find a Judge or a group of Judges with ebought courage would om exrpertence, be unexpected". See, EX--3. 42. That the defendants, TIME inc., George NcMillian, 7. Jeary Haile, Willian Bratford Huie, and Gerold Frank are guilty of the violation as follows: : ~~ (a) of libeling plaintiff in said TIME article with nalicios intent. 4&5. That the defendants, TIME inc., George McHillian, #. Henry Halle, are guilty of the violation as follows: - 4 (a) of acting in colluaion, by the nature of said article and it's publiahing date, to influence the U.S. 6th circuit court of appeals in, . Ray ve. Hose, Ha. 73-1543, adversely to herein Plaintitt, thus obstructing justice and violating plaintiff's civil rights. ‘ ? ‘A.-That defendant, Meviiitan,te in addition guilty of the viclation : a . vi - as follows: 7 (a) of receving & publishing malicious carerial from defendants, Huie & Frank, with a reckless disregard for the truth or falaity of said material thus compounding NeMillian's libel, . - wee ee 45. That defendant, Hute, ie in addition guilty of the violation as follows: *(a) of lideling with walicious inteny by falsely charging on a CBS-TY special dated January 2, 1976, and hosted by Dan Rather, that “laint- iff had in effect aurdered, Rev. Martin Luther King ‘Ure and, robbed a loan ‘company in, Loncon, England. Ms That defendant, Hatle, ia guilty of the additional violationras follors: (a) of violating Plaintiff's etvil rights with malicious intent by siding & abetting defendant, MeMiliian, in his (Meailiian's) publisying said article, through furnishing MeMilidan information from the files of the Tennessee Attorney General's office rulle he (Haile) was asst. att. Gen. (bv) of having direct knowledge resulting from bis tenure in the Tennessee A.G. office and his association with the aforenentioned, Percy Foreman & Willien L. Barry, of the trutYulness of allegation cade in ecount-3 herein above, thus violating Flaintiff's civil rights. -191-