Request for retraction of inaccurate post by Demorest Law Firm (Updated)

Now I just submitted to info@demolaw.com the following request for retraction regarding the lawsuit I filed against Al-Azhar Pacha.

Attorney Lisa Okasinski, Nezar Habhab and to whom it may concern:

I am the plaintiff in Viggers v. Pacha. I just read the post http://www.detroitbusinesslaw.com/2017/09/22/former-employers-disclosure-threats-new-employer-not-create-liability-defamation/ allegedly written by Nezar Habhab. Hereby I request you to retract the inaccuracies in your post. I do not blame you for the distorted and fraudulent "review" released by the Michigan Court Of Appeals, but your post confuses issues by unduly adding some false and misleading statements. Please be more responsible when you write about appellate decisions.

Your article falsely portrays that I "stated" that ALPAC's failure to sponsor me [for a greencard] "may result in some kind of revenge". That is not what I wrote (see page 2 of the COA's opinion). Your paraphrasing or juxtaposition of statements is substantially false and misleading. Moreover, from the entirety of my email to defendant  Al Pacha it is clear that my expression "some kind of revenge" refers my fear that defendant Al Pacha was retaliating for my decision to retain the University's offer of employment (see Exhibit B in my complaint against Al Pacha). Documents of this case are available at  http://www.oneclubofjusticides.com/p/viggers-v-pacha_74.html .

It is noteworthy that, during his deposition, defendant Al Pacha was embarrassingly unable to articulate his alleged interpretation of the proverb ("what goes around comes around") upon which he belatedly justified his false accusations. This is relevant to the matter of a defendant's state of mind (actual malice).

Also your clause of "Acting quickly to save face" is unduly prejudicial. For over three months, defendant Al Pacha as well as the nonparty University of Michigan incurred silent fraud as recently defined by the Michigan Supreme Court (see my Application for Leave to Appeal in the Michigan Supreme Court). Al Pacha's silent fraud constitutes circumstantial evidence that Al Pacha made his false and defamatory statements with actual malice ... I am sure that you are acquainted with the concept of a defendant's consciousness of guilt, which also constitutes a mental state.

In the brief I filed in the Michigan Supreme Court, I am pointing to multiple proofs (supported by the existing case law) I submitted as evidence of Al-Azhar Pacha's  actual malice at the time he made his false and defamatory statements. There, you will notice that I proved actual malice not only under the aspect of knowledge of falsity, or with a reckless disregard for the truth of the statements, but also under criteria including but not limited to: 

(1) Al Pacha's purposeful avoidance of the truth; 

(2) his refusal to retract statements that have been proved false; 

(3) his consciousness of guilt (see his aforementioned silent fraud); 

(4) his "entertaining serious doubts" regarding the "veracity" of his defamatory statements (Al Pacha waited twenty days before he urgently asked to meet with the University "as soon as possible"); and 

(5) Al Pacha's deliberate choice not to show the University employees the allegedly "threatening" emails upon which he fabricated his fraudulent stories.

To avoid repeating content, I encourage you to read my recent post from October 26, 2017, at http://www.oneclubofjusticides.com/search/label/Viggers%20v.%20Pacha, where I dismantle a number of inaccuracies of fact and of law that the Michigan Court Of Appeals incurred in its so-called "appellate review". That post is in response to an article by LegalNews.com discussing the decision.

Please be aware that I am posting the instant request for retraction at http://www.oneclubofjusticides.com because your potential clients and the public deserve to know whether or not members of Demorest Law Firm conduct themselves with honesty when their false statement(s) is (are) disproved.

Kind regards,

Ignacio Viggers

UPDATE on 10/31/2017 at 1:40 PM (EST)

Demorest Law Firm has corrected the inaccuracies I reported. Thank you attorney Mike Hayes for the follow-up.