We just received this copy of a letter from a reader. We have redacted his name out of courtesy but are publishing this to show the sort of anguish some of our writings are causing to people who richly deserve them.
January 17, 2017
Jack W. Stewart, Esq
61 North Market Street
Asheville, NC 28802
Re: Your communication of January 5, 2016
Dear Mr. Stewart:
Your letter of the fifth of January, last year, was forwarded to me and received as of this date.
I am constrained to say that I have never received such a bizarre, inaccurate, and nearly unintelligible, communication from any alleged professional source in the past.
I categorically state that am not A.D. Royster and am not in any way connected with said A.D. Royster other than to have read a website he authors in which he exposes makers and merchandisers of fraudulent and counterfeit German militaria.
I also state that I have not informed any law enforcement agency about possible felonies committed by your client, Lana Cantrell, owner and operator of “Germania International, Inc.” or her husband, Robert Johnson, listed in your letter as her Historic Advisor.
Following a perusal of your letter, I accessed the Royster site on the Internet and searched, in vain, for any reference whatsoever to any comments about “gold bars and large denominations of cash” in the possession of Cantrell or Johnson.
Should these individuals indeed be in possession of such fiscal objects, this would be of absolutely no interest whatsoever to me although there might well be Federal agencies who would be interested.
In the event your clients, with or without your knowledge, were engaged in attempts at tax avoidance or other illegal activities, I would assume that anyone reporting these to competent authority could hardly be construed as committing either harassment or cyberstalking.
To report a crime, or alleged crime, to competent authority is not considered harassment or cyberstalking
To have knowledge of a violation of the law and to conceal it from competent authority would, in and of itself, constitute a breach of the law and make the possessor of such knowledge an accessory before the fact.
I will acknowledge that Mr. Johnson and Germania International, Inc. have not had what could be termed a good press, reputation-wise, on the Internet and I, personally, would never either purchase anything from them which they alleged to be genuine, and neither would I be able to truthfully recommend them to any collector wishing my personal opinion.
You have stated that the Royster site contains material about possible tax fraud and other negative acts on the part of your clients.
You have requested that I remove these from the Royster site.
In the first instance, I would require you to cite chapter and verse and specifically quote any alleged misstatements made by Mr. Royster concerning the issues herewith set forth on his website and in the second, since I am not Mr. Royster, never have been Mr. Royster and do not maintain any such website, it ought to be patently obvious that I would be unable to alter any of his postings.
Might I suggest that the proper course for you to follow would be to send your objections directly to Mr. Royster?
Some time ago, I received another letter from your office alleging some kind of a business transaction between myself and your client(s).
In response to this, I categorically denied ever having had any such transactions with said client(s) and as in the present instance, I also categorically deny any of your, and your client’s, allegations..
Further, I request that you cease and desist sending me such communications and in the event that you disregard my request, I will take further steps to assure that you do not do so in the future.
And be advised that I am forwarding a copy of this communication to various institutions and potentially interested parties, to include, but not be limited to, the A.D. Royster website.