>>>>>>What nonsense is this! So now John Koziol will gonna reveal to you things that apparently can't be said in public? Can I be added to the list of trusted persons please?
>>>>>
>>>>>Peter, does it even occur to you that Mike and John actually know each other and have been friends for 20 years?
>>>>
>>>>Is it important to know this in this context? I don't think so. The effect of the statement that John made here (go back some messages) is that AK/MA are excused and that they are only still accused by those who do not know the whole story from inside. This kind of defense of them is unfair. The arguments must be in the open, or they must not be used or mentioned or referred to.
>>>
>>>I did not want to get involved in this discussion, but one thing must be said: We have heard more or less everything from one side here, but as soon as something is hinted from the other side, all of a sudden it's unfair? Who are we, are we judges or jury? I strongly feel that we shall let the involved parties straighten things up without our involvment. I hope more people agree with me.
>>
>>The 'other side' has been invited on many occasions to express their arguments. AK/MA refuse to react here.
>>
>>The 'hinting' bears an implicit accusation of NN and an excusation of AK/MA, without revealing the argumentation. That's unfair indeed, VERY unfair!
>
>Maybe they simply have the integrity to NOT broadcast what should be held private, Have you ever considered that possibility? You are not a part in this, I am not a part in this, we have absolutely NO right to ask for any apology or any comments from anyone in this case. This was, and still is, either a private matter or a legal matter.
>
>To make it perfectly clear: I do not take ANY side in this. I just want to stop this ridiculous argument where everyone seems to know everything, but the truth is that only two or three people really know what happened. I don't accuse anyone or hint that anyone is lying, I simply state that we don't know enough to make any conclusion or judgement. And secondly, we simply are not parts in this.

First, it's good to see you being a cool head as always.

I agree with you up to a point, including the part about us not being entitled to explanations. But we do know some of what happened. We have seen the letters Andy and Marcia sent to Naomi's employer and we know she was subsequently let go from that job. We do not know the letters were the reason for the dismissal. IMO it would take quite a belief in coincidence to think there was no connection.

PS -- Given that John offered to discuss this further in email, I should point out that I have not heard back from him yet (he seems to come here mostly at night) and do not have any information at all that has not been posted on the UT.