◆ SpookStack

ee] 1 4 | 1 ' r f . . ‘ . . . . . aa Size. ee ee ree te wees ned is. a Do A EMILY HARRIS, WILLIAM HARRIS, PLAINTIFFS VERSES -CHARLES W. BATES; ET AL DEFENDANTS CV 76 0034 ce Filed U.S. District Court) Central District of California "4 4 wut ond T ‘ 4 Day : “ a _f 12, as 1 2 a ee he ae Defendant is without sufficient information on which to _ base an answer to. the remainder of the allegations contained in plaintiffs’ paragraph 35. — 36. ° Defendant Gebhardt denies the allegations contained in plaintiffs' paragraph 36 insofar as they * allege plaintiffs were charged by indictment rather than - ‘ complaint and insofar as they allege plaintiffs were charged with eight felony counts rather than 19 felony counts. 37. Admitted. 39-45. Defendant Gebhardt incorporates by reference his responses set forth in paragraph eight of this answer. Defendant denies he or any of his agents or employees acting in concert with him have committed, participated in, caused or promoted the release or dissemination of leads, information or gossip to members of the media with the intent to infringe and impair the rights of plaintiffs to a fair and impartial trial on the charges pending against then. Defendant admits the Los Angeles Division of the FBI has made available to the general media three press releases | ‘ which deal with the plaintiffs. (See defense exhibits A, _-B, and C). Defendant further admits inquiries from the ‘media concerning plaintiffs have deen received by the Los Angeles Division of the FBI. Defendant alleges that responses to these media inquiries were handled in accord- ange with the guidelines established by the United States Defartment of Justice and the FBI for release of informatio togthe media during the course of a criminal investigation |! a a a a era Peye k nn ny wo, : - 7 Ora. SRM net AE Lk, ale Ne et ene all a a en Uy REMI MS AA rE “Ara 5 imate ht fy eo being conducted by the FBI. Defendant denies the afore- i: Pe, mentioned press releases or the aforementioned responses ee made to medina innmiirter were prejudicial to the plaintiffs eo : OO -~3- wr amen ee ae oe eee