Can you be tracked?
I also forgot to mention that the post that my buddy left, along with some of the other posts from other people who bashed on this guy were deleted from the online newspaper website. Next to each comment, there is a "report abuse" tab if anyone is offended by a comment I suppose.
But ya, I probably got nothing to worry about still.
But ya, I probably got nothing to worry about still.
Originally Posted by thebig33tuna' date='Jan 14 2009, 04:42 PM
also that 'lawyer' writes about as well as the average 6th grader so I personally wouldn't be worried. 

Originally Posted by pilotsteve' date='Jan 14 2009, 03:12 PM
Here's the posting from this so called lawyer guy......
To all "brilliant bloggers", defamating individuals directly by name as the folowing have, "Class of 2011, Alumnus, Swordsmen, Grow up, Get serious, Kitty and the list goes on", I strongly suggest each of you consider consulting your legal options as you have compromised individuals by name, occupation, their children and families.
Each one of you will be "personally" named once the subpeona is in place and the City will politely place a column for everyone to read, share and blog with each of you as you have so kindly done in the past several weeks but not behind your blogging name, your LEGAL names.
Although, this is America and we do have the "freedom of speach" we do NOT have the right to defamate one's character or slander them by speculation beyond recognition. And for those of you whom do not understand:
Defamation of character includes slander (spoken derogatory statements), libel (written derogatory statements) or both. To constitute actionable defamation, the statements must be false or proven, and expose a person to hatred, ridicule or contempt. You also can pursue a case if the defamation harms you in your occupation. And in my clients case "it has"... In otherwords, "Brilliant Bloggers" "think before another word, name, or blatant statement is made" in regard to anyone at this school, their families, their wives or their children.
I encourage not only the NAMED victims to file a complaint in state court. You will simply need to identify the person making the defamatory statements and lay out the factual elements of your claim. Ask for actual damages incurred as well as punitive damages. The blogging names should become "public knowledge" very soon.
Good evening.
To all "brilliant bloggers", defamating individuals directly by name as the folowing have, "Class of 2011, Alumnus, Swordsmen, Grow up, Get serious, Kitty and the list goes on", I strongly suggest each of you consider consulting your legal options as you have compromised individuals by name, occupation, their children and families.
Each one of you will be "personally" named once the subpeona is in place and the City will politely place a column for everyone to read, share and blog with each of you as you have so kindly done in the past several weeks but not behind your blogging name, your LEGAL names.
Although, this is America and we do have the "freedom of speach" we do NOT have the right to defamate one's character or slander them by speculation beyond recognition. And for those of you whom do not understand:
Defamation of character includes slander (spoken derogatory statements), libel (written derogatory statements) or both. To constitute actionable defamation, the statements must be false or proven, and expose a person to hatred, ridicule or contempt. You also can pursue a case if the defamation harms you in your occupation. And in my clients case "it has"... In otherwords, "Brilliant Bloggers" "think before another word, name, or blatant statement is made" in regard to anyone at this school, their families, their wives or their children.
I encourage not only the NAMED victims to file a complaint in state court. You will simply need to identify the person making the defamatory statements and lay out the factual elements of your claim. Ask for actual damages incurred as well as punitive damages. The blogging names should become "public knowledge" very soon.
Good evening.
1. "Defamating" isn't a word. It should be "defaming". Accordingly, "defamate" isn't a word either. Perhaps he was thinking of "defecate" and "defame" and somehow mixed them together.
2. He spelled it "subpeona" and it should be "subpoena". If there's one word a lawyer should know, it's that one.
Sounds to me like it's someone pretending to be a lawyer that happened to copy and paste a few definitions from an online text or dictionary (probably Wikipedia).







