Suing over "web smears", allowable or not?

So Matthew Couloute Jr., who is an attorney in Manhattan, has filed a lawsuit against two of his ex-girlfriends for comments they made on the net against his character. One of his ex-girlfriends, Blitsch, a former "RollerJam" star and now a professional trainer, has a six year old son with Couloute. The other, Ryncarz says she did blast Couloute online but all the comments were true. Is this any different than the TV reality show Cheaters or Jerry Springer? What about freedom of speech which is what the women’s attorney is countering? He says it is ruining his life. They have called him a cheater and a liar, which is true.

What do you think, do they have the right or not to web smear? I think they do. But it isn't very moral. By the way, he has filed his claims in Federal court.


www.nypost.com...
www.nypost.com...

If there is a way to sue, Americans will find it.

reply to post by Gridrebel


If people can call Clinton/Bush/Obummer a reptilian overmaster, then this guy's ex should be able to call him a cheater...

Just sayin'...

Dbl post. Please delete.

reply to post by Gridrebel


A court could probably get them to remove it from all US based websites but that's it. A court could not stop people talking about it amongst themselves. If content was hosted overseas then the US court would have no jurisdiction to make them remove it. He could hire a hacker to remove it but that could somehow breach US law

Who Knows

reply to post by Gridrebel



If it is true that he cheated and lied well guess what. It's not a smear (slander) and no court will force anyone to remove it. All the defendants have to do is prove that what they said about the person is true. Slander is only Slander when your making something up about another individual. Now if thats the case then they will probably be forced to pay some sort of money.

Well I'm curious to see if they change the law somehow to include "retaliatory malicious, even if it's true" type of language. From what I understand, it is true. He doesn't like it and it's affected his purchasing of a home and his business. I guess, people might be a little more careful on how they treat others so they don't get slammed on the internet. Put's a whole new meaning on "paybacks are hell". I wonder how long this will take to get dismissed.

I think that these women are perfectly in their rights. As much as it is trampled on, the first amendment still exists. They are practicing the rights given to them by that document. They are not lying in the words they say, but are saying the truth. Because it is the truth, they are not doing nothing unmoral or illegal (in my opinion).

This guy probably just cannot come to terms with the faults in his character, and therefore he tries to hide from them. He probably just does not like it when other people remind him of those faults.

Originally posted by Gridrebel
So Matthew Couloute Jr., who is an attorney in Manhattan, has filed a lawsuit against two of his ex-girlfriends for comments they made on the net against his character. One of his ex-girlfriends, Blitsch, a former "RollerJam" star and now a professional trainer, has a six year old son with Couloute. The other, Ryncarz says she did blast Couloute online but all the comments were true. Is this any different than the TV reality show Cheaters or Jerry Springer? What about freedom of speech which is what the women’s attorney is countering? He says it is ruining his life. They have called him a cheater and a liar, which is true.

What do you think, do they have the right or not to web smear? I think they do. But it isn't very moral. By the way, he has filed his claims in Federal court.


www.nypost.com...
www.nypost.com...

edit on 26-1-2012 by Gridrebel because: (no reason given)

If it is defamation of character, then yes. Granted it would be a pain to prove in court but you can sue someone for it.

If it is a continuing and stalking like thing, like going out of their way to trash him to neighbors, relatives and employees, might be stalking/harassment or perhaps even DV as in emotional abuse(in American Courts it might be a stretch but under existing law in most European nations not so, but since this is America well yeah).

But using a precedent from a Southern PA Family Court(A guy had a blog about going through divorce with a psycho ex and turned it into a support group for men and women dealing with psycho ex's. The feminist Judge and the Psycho ex didn't like it and ordered it shut down) he might be able to file a cease and decist order.

The problem with the article is:
1) Written by a Mangina and a feminist
2) the Plaintiffs side of the story is not existent and we will have to wait till the court proceedings start to know anything(Remember the claim that "everything said is true" is coming from the defendant, akin to a murder saying "I didn't do it") . So until the Plaintiff confirms or denies the truth of the arguments, we can only speculate.

3) Notice at the end:

Gloria Allred

“We believe lawsuits of this kind should not be allowed,” she said.

“The public policy of this nation should be that women have the right to exercise their free speech and should not be silenced and afraid to speak out if hey have experiences with men who have lied to them or cheated on them.”

Read more: www.nypost.com...

Notice how the feminist attorney seeks to deny the right to file a lawsuit, and then reinforces that with a gendered notion. Not saying "people" or "individual's", but in a manner that expressly enables women to engage in actions that they would seek to deny men of being able to do.

And frankly the way their attorney comes off as a blatant female supremacist, ohh wait, according to even other feminist's Gloria Allred is an out an out bigot:

Gloria Allred
"Men need to be accountable for their lives and they'll suffer the consequences if they're not."
jezebel.com...

CNN about Gloria Allred money.cnn.com...
she filed a sexual discrimination complaint with the state to remove the club's tax deductions in order to gain access to its health facilities. She won, of course, and used the opportunity to enter the steam room with a measuring tape singing Peggy Lee's "Is That All There Is?"

What type of person picks such a type a lawyer? Maybe his case has merit after all?