Postle Without Aid As Court Plot Thickens
Mike Postle is staring down the barrel of a gun of hundreds of thousands in potential legal fees. The alleged Poker cheat will also have to find new legal representation after lawyer Mac Verstandig last December applied to a Sacramento court to be relieved as counsel in the matter of Postle vs the Poker world, aka Todd Witteles and Postlegate whistleblower Veronica Brill. Both Mac Verstandig and Steven Lowe have now effectively left the building.
The most recent development in Postle’s suspect legal defamation action is probably the most deflating to date, with defamers Todd Witteles and Veronica Brill having both filed anti-SLAPP motions against the alleged cheat, meaning Postle may end up having no recourse whatsoever – not to mention be held liable in legal fees for that lack of avenue.
If Postle’s complaints filed against his supposed defamers were to be struck by the relevant California courts, he’s going to soon find himself on the hook for wasted legal costs running into the seven figures.
Postle May Be In For The Pound
SLAPP laws – which is short for strategic lawsuit against public participation – were put into place to make provision for the early dismissal of a lawsuit considered to be without actual merit. An anti-SLAPP application seeks to turn the tables on someone who is thought to have only filed a lawsuit for the purpose of intimidating and silencing their opponents.
Anti-SLAPP motions, such as the ones filed against Postle by Brill and Witteles, provide a way for people at the receiving end of malice and intimidation to have the payment of their own legal fees covered in the event that they should emerge successful to have a case thrown from court. And since Californian anti-SLAPP laws are considered some of the most watertight in the country, Postle may be in for quite the ride indeed.
Success Now A Tall Order
According to Witteles and Brill, they did nothing more than exercise their constitutional right to free speech when they blew the whistle on Postle. And since Postle was at the time of the Stones Hall cheating scandal considered a figure of public interest, he’ll now have to prove malicious intent having been at the order of the day on the parts of all the former respondents in his defamation application.
As for who gets to represent Postle in February when Witteles and Brill’s applications have their respective days in court, it’s all very much up in the air, leaving the accuser with less than a month to come up with a willing legal participant.