Wednesday, April 15, 2009

More From Shady Promoter's Attorney

"I have placed a call to my client regarding your interview. He will not be speaking to you directly. However, I will make a few comments on his behalf if he authorizes me to do so. I feel that it is very important to clarify a few points.
  1. Shady Kansas City Promotion Trying to Screw One of Fred Ettish's Fighters. (FALSE)
  2. "A shady Kansas City-based promotion called CQC, which held an event in the KC area on March 21st, is trying to screw one of Fred Ettish's fighters." (FALSE)

These are both false statements and I have duly notified you, through my cease and desist letter, that these statements are false. I'm glad you cited New York v. Sullivan in your email dated April 6, 2009. That case stated: public officials cannot recover in a defamation suit unless he/she can show the statement was made with "'actual malice' - that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." I am telling you for the second time that Rick Huddleston is not trying to screw any fighter. If you continue to publish articles stating that he is, you will be making statements in "reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." Furthermore, New York v. Sullivan is only relevant in regard to "government and public officials." Rick Huddleston is not a public official or public figure. He is a private individual.

Ultimately, I would like to speak to you, on behalf of Mr. Huddleston, to clear the air. While I am not at liberty to discuss much of the factual information relating to this case, I have some information that I would like to provide for you. This information should be quite helpful to you in your search for the "truth" in this present matter. I don't know if you have spoken to Mr. Francis or Mr. Kuny (Francis' attorney), but I do not believe it would be ethical for me to reveal all facts relating to the present breach of contract dispute.

In closing, I would like some information from you, in return for the information I will be providing you. You are the editor for Full Contact Fighter Magazine. I would like some information about this publication. Corporate office? Address? Number? In case I ever need to contact you directly.


Shady Promoter's attorney"

MMA Journalist on Radio Show Last Night

Check out the Ground & Pound Radio show, which featured MMA Journalist rapping about UFC 97. Link here: .

Scott Coker Explains Strikeforce's Payouts

The California State Athletic Commission released the official payouts for Strikeforce's "Shamrock vs. Diaz" magnum opus at the HP Pavilion in San Jose last weekend, and the numbers have managed to raise more than a few eyebrows. MMA Journalist contacted Strikeforce High Priest Scott Coker for an explanation on some of the purses and the veteran promoter was more than forthcoming with his responses.
  • On Frank Shamrock receiving $369,790: "Frank is a pioneer and a legend in the sport. However, his best days are behind him and now he fights because he needs the money. So really, we're giving him the money so we hopefully don't have to see him fight much more. Boy, did his performance the other night suck or what?"
  • On Nick Diaz receiving only $39,950 for defeating Shamrock: "Actually, that's the amount of cash Nick was paid. He was also given a bale of marijuana, which was part of his contract. He's pretty happy."
  • On Cris "Cyborg" Santos getting paid $18,000 while Hitomi Akano only made $1,450: "They were paid by the pound."
  • On Shingo Kohara and Jeremy Tavares making only $940 each: "Dude, do you even know who they are? I still don't, and they fought on my show!"