Mister Viglione writes a story about a blog that was once on the internet. A blog called The Vibrant mind. He mentions a post of this now defunct blog as being also copied over to a TV3 Medford website or blog or some such. The truth of the matter is that Mister Viglione is the one who found that post on this now-extinct blog and he is the one who circulated it around on the internet. He did this out of revenge for an incident that occurred at City Hall some years ago. Shortly after this incident, Joe Viglione began cyber stalking and doxing the individual at City Hall who made Joe out to be a fool (at least this is how Joe feels - in reality Joe Viglione is the one who makes himself out to look like a fool whenever he publicly lies).
mister is an adjudged libeler, so declared by a Massachusetts court finding for the plaintiffs Medford Community Cablevision and Frank Pilleri. In further court cases, Mister Viglione was not found guilty of defamation, but not because he had posted NOT untruths on the internet, but rather because the judge ruled that Mr. Viglione's postings were so obviously untrue that no respectable segment of the community would believe him (case of Natalia vs Viglione in Massachusetts). the judge said that if no one believed Mr Viglione's lies, then he was not defaming anyone. Keep this in mind the next time you are inclined to believe something Joe writes on the internet. Additionally, in that same case Mr Viglione testified under penalty of perjury that NONE of what he writes on his Medfordinformationcentral - type blog is true, rather they are all parodies. Remember, he said this under oath and under the penalties of perjury. This was a rather singular statement to make in light of the fact that 3 of those blog entries Joe swore were untrue parodies in the Natalia case, are also 3 of the blog enrtries in the MCC/Pilleri case, at which time he
Joe swore under oath UNDER PENALTY of PERJURY that they were absolutely true. Let's see now, these three blog entries are true but at the same time they are untrue parodies. Okay so is Joe Viglione admitting he is truthfully lying, or is he admitting he is lying when he is telling the truth? Either way you look at it, Joe Viglione has committed perjury someplace. I wonder if the statute of limitations has run out on this yet? I wonder if any of this can and/or will be used against him in a court of law when he goes on trail for the criminal charge of Witness Intimidation? this is something he was arraigned on earlier this year, as was reported in the Medford Transcript abut a month after the fact.
P.S. The Medford Transcript scooped Joe Viglione on the reporting of his own arraignment. How did Joe miss this one? Did one of his snitches forget to tell Joe that he'd been arraigned?