Trolls Trolls Trolls ... SQUIRM

The Blackmail Tapes ... PedoFiles are proving to be true!
Randi has FAILED to explain the pedophelia.
In the Court against Randi case the Judge tells the jury that they can not believe what Randi has told them and they must listen to this tape ... After they did ..Randi LOST!!!!!
Here's what the JUDGE SAID...
I have listened to the tape. I have carefully and agonizingly reflected on this. It is possible, it is possible that your client told this Court, this jury, and the New York Skeptics a bald face lie. It is possible. The jury is going to have to evaluate that. I don't know how they can evaluate that if they don't hear this and determine which version is true.
-------------------------------------------------------
PLEASE LISTEN TO THE RECORDING !!!!
--------------------------------------------------------
THE ARTICLE PROOF
As mentioned in our Sept. 1st issue, magician/debunker James Randi makes the following assertion in his April 1999 Position Statement:
"When...Eldon Byrd sued me in Baltimore a few years ago, his lawyer brought up the famous tape recording as evidence against my character. My own lawyer, at my insistence, asked that the entire tape be played for the courtroom and jury, so that the true nature of the record would be understood, instead of being misrepresented as it usually was."
We now have a portion of the transcript of the Eldon Byrd vs. James Randi et al trial, dated May 26th, 1993. From a reading of this transcript it is abundantly clear that Randi's lawyer, named Diane Margaret Link, made every effort to persuade Judge Marvin J. Garbis not to let the jury hear the tape, which of course is the same so-called Blackmail Tape that we have referred to in "Smear" many times in the past.
Here, verbatim, is part of that excerpt from the official record of that trial:
MS. LANK:
May I respectfully ask how the tape is relevant, your Honor? What defamatory statements alleged by Mr. Byrd are related to that tape?
THE COURT:
Fortunately I don't have to persuade you that I'm right. I have to ultimately persuade the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit that I am properly exercising my discretion in this case, which I am doing.
I have listened to the tape. I have carefully and agonizingly reflected on this. It is possible, it is possible that your client told this Court, this jury, and the New York Skeptics a bald face lie. It is possible. The jury is going to have to evaluate that. I don't know how they can evaluate that if they don't hear this and determine which version is true.
If he has said a falsity about this tape and this is the tape he accused Mr. Byrd of manipulating, then I think it is relevant to this case, to his credibility and to the issues in this case with regard to whether or not he knew that other statements were false.
He had this tape. He knew what this tape was. He said things about Mr. Byrd relevant to this tape that the jury may find false, they may find are true.
What you have said and your position has been is that this tape is material. Mr. Randi is leading on some obscene callers. If your version is true, it is benign. I trust the jury. But if your version is not true, then the jury is
entitled to know that. This issue is closed.
The Blackmail Tape was then played for the jury, obviously over the objections of Ms. Lank, who presumably was acting in behalf of her client, James Randi.
Randi apparently does not want the American public to hear this Tape, either. Why not???