Hundreds who posted views on sex assault trial targeted in Tarrant suit

reply to post by greeneyedleo


Opinions are just that-OPINIONS.
They are not in any way libalous unless the include deliberate false information.

This is a clear violation of 1st amendment rights.

I wonder if the judge has even read the United States Constitution????

I am still thinking about this issue, especially after discussing it with someone else, off ATS.

If these people were able to sue the posters after the judge demanding the anonymous people's identities be handed over ( and we still dont know exactly what was said) would a thread like this be something that could result in her suing those who responded with not so nice things?

Octuplet Mom Defends....

If she reads this thread, does she now have a case against us (I say us, because even I posted on it and wasnt so nice)?


[edit on 2/8/2009 by greeneyedleo]

Interesting how an ATS Forum Moderator or Site Owners have yet to make statements about this. How about a few words?

[edit on 8-2-2009 by solarstorm]

I, for one support 100% net neutrality where you can speak what ever you wanted to without fear of getting sued.

Imagine, if people were held accountable for everything they've ever said on the net places like ATS would not exist.

"He said Hilary's a reptilian! Sue him!"

Something about this just doesnt sit right with me . I know that unless there is no chance what so ever of winning a Lawyer will always encourage there client to take action . The possibility of differnt legal jurisdictions and the logistics of suing(SP?) so many people set alarm bells off in my head . IMO this could well be the set up for scrams in the mould of that come out of Nigeria.

Haha, wow.

From the article:

"They were perverted, sick, vile, inhumane accusations," said Mark Lesher in a telephone interview from Clarksville, Texas.

Why just today on counterstrike a pre-teen threatened to do some pretty creative things to my mom's body upon her death...should I sue?

Do they want a bandage for their ouchey?

On second thought: I am going to sue those attempting to sue for damage to my faith in humanity. I think I have a pretty solid case.

[edit on 2/8/0909 by spines]

[edit on 2/8/0909 by spines]

i thought your laws protected you from things like this but that said - i'm glad at least one judge knows there's a line that shouldn't be crossed when it comes to media kangaroo courts.

good luck to them!

This doesn't make allot of sense to me.

Who is going to extradite 170 some odd people, then house and feed them? What if each one demands an extradition hearing? That ups the price even more.

With the exception of a few that made have made "she deserved it" type comments, this lawsuit is a scare tactic only.

It's lawsuit harassment at it's finest. The ISPs will fight it. The ACLU would most likely pick it up. And I will guess the suit would be refused before it made it to the US Supreme Court.

This is a scare suit. All one would have to do is hire a defense attorney and the plaintiff would probably move on to someone who doesn't have that capability.

I am guessing we don't have all the facts on this issue.

What kind of dumb crap ruling is this...

Buncha greedy ass lawyers probably bribed the judge or something.

Ok, I guess we'll have to school the legal system again. Please take a look at this link at roughly 2:15 (this is helpful too for any here wanting to do any video pods and plan on making money off of it. I know I got some money by doing a video for this site.)
current.com...
So yes, if we have a negative opinion about Obama, or Paris Hilton, or ANYONE, guess what? we're allowed to voice it, and nothing the legal system tries to say can stop that. So SHOVE IT!

Now... if the judge of say, the OJ case, did not want to have people voicing their opinions on who is/was the killer, then here's a helpful hint... DON'T F***ING TELEVISE THE D*MN EVENT! Now I don't know if this case was televised or not, but it obviously made it to the news... so guess what? people are going to talk about it, and voice their opinions! DUH! Are you telling me the judge is so out of touch with humanity he can't tell whether humans have opinions or not?

It's called freedom of speech, theres not a DAMN thing that can be done to citizens who exercise this freedom. The judge has obviously overstepped his authority. I think that everyone should understand that you cannot be tried in a court of law for expressing your opinions regardless of how tasteless or bizarre they might be.

God Bless America!

reply to Meant to quote Questions comment.


he's just a noob, hopefully you pwned him, lol.

BTW I beta tested CS with Valve several years ago, we had 2 servers and only us beta testers were allowed to play; now I play and own and get called noob by 14 yr old kids; Funny world.

[edit on 8-2-2009 by interested-one]

[edit on 8-2-2009 by interested-one]

[edit on 8-2-2009 by interested-one]

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
I am still thinking about this issue, especially after discussing it with someone else, off ATS.

If these people were able to sue the posters after the judge demanding the anonymous people's identities be handed over ( and we still dont know exactly what was said) would a thread like this be something that could result in her suing those who responded with not so nice things?

Octuplet Mom Defends....

If she reads this thread, does she now have a case against us (I say us, because even I posted on it and wasnt so nice)?


[edit on 2/8/2009 by greeneyedleo]

You know what I say *snip* and her lawyer and the judge.

Go ahead and turn my name over, I am ready to fight for my right to free speech!

====
Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 2/9/2009 by Badge01]

greedy lawyers, politicians and stupid judges who will not uphold our constitution are one of the biggest problems in this used to be great country. as for sex offenders put them all on an island and nuke them. only good sex offender i know of is when my gf attacks me in the middle of the night- maybe i can sue her too now. but when they read thsi now i'll probably have 4 lawsuits against me because obviously my 1st amendment right no longer exists

Originally posted by solarstorm
Interesting how an ATS Forum Moderator or Site Owners have yet to make statements about this. How about a few words?

Nah, it's not really that concerning, to me anyway....It's expected, for a while at least. ATS staff moves in unison at the top. Something like this will likely be discussed and vetted amongst admins and staff before an "official" position is taken and an "official" statement made. They are too smart not to. We might see a mod whip out a "boxed opinion" though....

I think you all are confused about a few things...

reply to post by interested-one

Originally posted by interested-one
It's called freedom of speech, theres not a DAMN thing that can be done to citizens who exercise this freedom. The judge has obviously overstepped his authority. I think that everyone should understand that you cannot be tried in a court of law for expressing your opinions regardless of how tasteless or bizarre they might be.

God Bless America!

reply to post by bigfoot1212

Originally posted by bigfoot1212
greedy lawyers, politicians and stupid judges who will not uphold our constitution are one of the biggest problems in this used to be great country. as for sex offenders put them all on an island and nuke them. only good sex offender i know of is when my gf attacks me in the middle of the night- maybe i can sue her too now. but when they read thsi now i'll probably have 4 lawsuits against me because obviously my 1st amendment right no longer exists

This is a CIVIL lawsuit. Not a criminal one.

The Constitution has nothing to do with this.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


I don't think there is anything new about this.

Think of it this way....

If someone printed up a bunch of pamphlets in your neighborhood unjustifiably accusing you, your spouse and children of being drug addicted satanists who have contracted some lethal disease that can be spread by casual contact, etc, etc... Do you think the law requires you to grin and bare it?

Defamation law goes waaaaay back-- long before even the Constitution. There really is nothing new here.

The risk of civil action has always been the case for ATS.


[edit on 8-2-2009 by loam]

The owners probably can't comment in this thread due to they can't comment on a case being investigated. All seriousness aside... I think this will happen on ATS in the very near future. Hopefully we'll catch wind of it.

I'm not sure how they can get you for saying something that is taken by all as opinion. Isn't that part of the T&C???

ATS T&C

3b) DMCA Enforcement: By posting on these domains, you grant the agents and officers of AboveTopSecret.com and its parent organization(s) the right to seek enforcement and legal remedy for any and all discovered usage violations falling under the DMCA and the Creative Commons content deed.

ATS T&C absolving themselves...

6a) Disclosure: The Above Network, LLC also reserves the right to disclose personal information when required by law or in the good-faith belief that such action is necessary to conform to the law or comply with a legal process served on The Above Network, LLC, protect and defend the rights or property of the The Above Network, LLC domains, or visitors to these domains, identify persons who may be violating the law, the legal notice, or the rights of third parties, and cooperate with the investigations of purported unlawful activities.

and

5) Personal Responsibilities: At all times, you remain solely responsible for anything found within your posts and agree to indemnify and hold The Above Network, LLC, harmless from any claim or demand, including reasonable attorneys' fees, made by any third party due to or arising out of any material you submit, post to or transmit through the message board, your use of the message board, your connection to the message board, your violation of these terms and conditions, or your violation of the rights of another.

So if anyone questions the opinion that you've made on ATS then ATS will recover costs from you for doing the dirty work. You are not entitled to your opinion or views any longer. And they have your IP so they know where you live. So much for freedom of expression, speech and any other freedom.... their taking it all away in the name of a fake terrorists and their need for security.

I could be wrong... IMHO

reply to post by AllTiedTogether


Thanks for posting all of that.
Something to chew on.

I just hope Ms.BabyMaker doesnt read what all I said about her here

reply to post by loam


yeah you are right i stand corrected and bow my head to you.
i was assuming it was a criminal offense. but now that i think about it it can't be. also remember libel and slander you can only sue over if it causes a monetary loss- other than that you can sue for defamation of character

reply to post by bigfoot1212


Please no bowing....

But thank you for that honest reply.

I'm not sure what the actual elements of libel are...I think it may differ in many states. But I wouldn't be surprised to see the monetary loss requirement in some of them.



[edit on 8-2-2009 by loam]