Bill Windsor Walks Into His Own Trap

Bill has a major problem brewing in the Lone Star State and its probably the main reason he has gone quiet for the most part.  The problem seems to be the Citizen's Participation Act passed a few years ago which allows for Anti-Slapp (strategic lawsuit against public participation) measures to be taken against legal abusers like Windsor.  Several defendants in the Windsor vs. Common Sense case have anti-slapp motions pending.  Windsor seems to have been blind-sided by this law as he has now filed an appeal with the State contesting the constitutionality of this law (I wonder if he knows its employed in over half of the states in the country?).  The real scary part for Bill is its as if this legislation was specially written just for him as it stops his legal abuse dead in its tracks and forces him to do something he can never do.....show cause.

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/anti-slapp-law-texas

"One of the benefits of the anti-SLAPP statute is that it enables you to get the SLAPP suit dismissed quickly. After receiving your motion to dismiss, the court must rule on your motion within thirty days, unless the court's docket is overbooked. Once your motion to dismiss is filed, discovery proceedings on the claim will be stayed, or postponed, until the court disposes of the motion – that is, the plaintiff generally may not ask you to produce documents, sit for a deposition, or answer formal written questions."

You can hear the disdain flowing from Bill already on this as he would claim that harassing and terrorizing people thought overly burdensome, costly and abusive discovery is as American and apple pie or something or other.  Oh but it gets much worse for Bill:

"Texas courts follow a two-step process when deciding a motion to dismiss under the anti-SLAPP law. First, you (as the party looking to invoke the anti-SLAPP statute) must show “by a preponderance of the evidence” that the plaintiff's claim is "based on, relates to, or is in response to" your exercise of the speech/petition/association rights described above. Once you successfully show that your online writing involves the exercise of those rights, the burden shifts to the plaintiff for step two. The plaintiff must establish "by clear and specific evidence" a prima facie case for each part of his or her original claim; if the plaintiff fails to show this, the court will dismiss the claim."

Uh oh.....Bill is in big trouble now as it is most certainly Bill's political and anti-judicial statements and goals that caused everyone to follow him in the first place.  Bill claims anyone who speaks out against his public goals is guilty of defamation, but I think  court is going to correctly see it as free speech.  But of course the really devastating part for Bill is the second part where he must establish "clear and specific evidence" for each of his claims.  His little game of "upon information and belief" with a wink and a nod is no longer going to cut it  That's going to be pretty hard when he flat out lied/made up every singe one of them.  The fake movie, the fake business, the marriage.....now thanks to legislation he never knew about....his bluff is going to be called up front instead of much later in the process.