Attached are three screen caps.
The first two are from the current litigation in Massachusetts, in which Bob Malm denies being a perjurer. He argues two things: A) That his discovery responses were drafted by Jeff Sugarland Chiow, and B) That he didn’t even know my mother’s name.
The third screen cap is from Bob Malm’s original sworn responses to my interrogatories, in which he claims that the reason he believes Mom’s blog was actually mine is that Mom — whom he references BY NAME — contacted him repeatedly to set up appointments, only to cancel.
So which is it? Both can’t be true.
Bob Malm, perjuring priest
#gracealexwatch
Attachments: