By GottaLaff

But will the Senate ethics committee investigate? Don't be silly:
Jennifer Firth, a local mortgage banker who was elected to the Board of Selectmen in 1999, filed a civil defamation suit against Brown in July of 2000, alleging that he had harassed her when she worked on his campaign in 1998, and then tried to smear her reputation around town with forged letters and emails.
I can see the attraction, what with his affinity for the
pink leather shorts and all. Who could resist a guy like that?
She also alleged that Brown told several people that he'd had an "intimate relationship" with her and that he had a stack of sexually explicit letters that Firth had sent him. In her suit, Firth says that she'd never been sexually intimate with Brown, nor did she ever send him the aforementioned letters. A 2000 article in the local paper, the Sun Chronicle reported that Brown had denied the charges; for her part, Firth said she felt that filing the suit was "the only way I could stop this."
Allegedly.
But wait! There's more! Two days later....
Two days after the lawsuit was filed, Jennifer Firth's lawyer, Harvey Schwartz, filed a motion to withdraw as her counsel, saying that "to the best of [Schwartz's] knowledge, information and belief, the above allegations [by Firth] are not supported by 'good grounds.'" The next day, Jennifer Firth withdrew her suit. It was dismissed with prejudice, which means it can never be re-filed. Brown told a local newspaper that her lawyer had decided to withdraw after he was presented with letters and e-mail messages that proved she'd been harassing Brown.
Maybe Firth should go before the ethics committee.
Come to think of it, maybe the ethics committee should go before the ethics committee.
Who paid Firth off, I wonder... Or maybe she had no case. Or maybe ... Or maybe...
Rushpublics are so good at making a lot out of allegations and conjecture, enough to ruin careers. Dems on the other hand....
More details, speculation, and the court documents
here.