Isn't There Only One Thing Left to Do About This?

[bass1965]

All we need is a millonaire to financially back the court costs and attorney fee's

[peoplescommittee]

What millionaire is going to stake their reputation on what the public views as an almost 40 year old hoax? Whether you believe this stuff or not, and personally I don't, it's never going to go to court. Let's say you believe it and actually manage to introduce a case -- what can you introduce as evidence into a courtroom?

* The "clues" on the albums are nothing more than speculation, if commonly reported speculation.
* Then there's the facial comparisons, and the PIA people (say what you will about their character) don't even need millions of dollars funded by a shadow government to prove that not everything used by the 60IF forum was exactly kosher (I suspect a lot of people, and not necessarily the founders of this forum, may have manufactured their own comparisons to "contribute to the cause," out of zeal for nabbing "Faul"). They're not even photo experts and they're pointing it out, what is a legit photo expert with the money and resources going to say?
* Voice comparisons might make it, but in a recording industry that makes no secret of "sweetening" the sound of its music, what exactly will that prove? If someone else sang on a Paul McCartney recording, it doesn't have to be nefarious necessarily.
* Do we even have a set time period for when the real Paul disappeared and the false one came in? Because after people started spending more time theorizing and less making sense, I don't think there's even a firm timeline anymore. How is that gonna look? "We can't say when he was replaced, but we just know he was." Yes, that will go over well with a judge.
* Have we even decided that the real Paul McCartney is dead? If he's not, and there is a double situation going on, all the defense has to do is produce the living Paul McCartney and the case is dismissed.
* About the only thing I think might be used to actually make a case in the courtroom is that the fingerprints when Paul was arrested in Japan in '80 don't match the fingerprints from when Paul toured Japan in '66. But you wouldn't be able to get hands on evidence like that without probable cause, and as I've said above point by point, I highly doubt we have even that.

This is say nothing of the fact that, if there is a cover-up at the highest levels, what makes you think they're going to acknowledge it in a court of law? If you're right, you're screwed. If you're wrong, you're still screwed. I don't see why people keep throwing up court, because the way you guys run your business, it ain't gonna happen, and even if you could organize yourselves and settle on one specific case to prove, it's not gonna be a decisive victory to anyone but"Faul."

[hotman637]

I agree,going to court against hillbillies is a losing proposition,lol.Everybody looks the same so it is hard to prove who did what and they are all related so they will back up each others lies.The only hope is something like the RICO statutes,where if you are shown to be in organised crime THAT is a crime. So just show that "Faul" is a hillbillie(easy) and make that a crime,lol.

[dmystified]

If we were 100 million or a billion strong, we wouldn't need money OR courts, or lawyers, either...

I don't think we ever saw the real Beatles in the U.S. Oh well, we're all just replacements anyway.

Know any good lawyer jokes?

Sorry about the opening post here, somehow it got away like the real Beatles.