GA sprayed a whole can of RAID over on Patch yesterday, but... darned those little varmints! So hard to get rid of.
Yesterday a Reform superstar of the blogging world was threatened with a SLAPP suit- for allegedly calling former Hoboken PIO Billy Campbell a 'drunk' on a blog or internet message board.
Today's SLAPP suit threat was lobbed at... GA!
Kim Cardinal, political operative wife of Lane Bajardi, and blogging as Curious Gal and 'prosbus', and new co-conspirators 'Be Heard' and 'Alan', are setting up a narrative that the speech they can't censor is fodder for a defamation claim.
Not only is such a cry of victimization from this gang of smear merchants hilarious, but they are posting bits of legal analysis that not only don't they understand, but in fact support the First Amendment and privacy rights of internet bloggers! That's you and me.
DUH...
Here's what Kimjardi did posting as Be Heard, the legal equivalent of Cheez-Whiz.
She snatched a blurb from a legal blog with respect to a NJ Superior Court of NJ Appellate Division case called Dendrite Corporation V.s John Doe 3 . And she plagiarized the blurb, providing neither source nor a link. (Thank you to Patch commenter We've Heard for sleuthing the legal blog source)
Next Kimjardi frames the blurb (the case was about a corporation making a defamation claim against an anonymous blogger) to murkily suggest that Reform BLOGGERS BEWARE: the long arm of the NJ Appellate Court will PUNISH you for your mean blog posts!
What is Kimjardi up to here?
They seem deeply frustrated that no amount of post deletion can stop the buzzing about Lane Bajardi's fire and brimstone City Council defense of Peter Cammarano's right to retain zoning appointments powers SIX DAYS AFTER Cammy sold 2 variances at The Malibu Diner. WOW. So, instead of answering the question on EVERYONE'S minds: what did Bajardi know about Cammy's Malibu variance-sale and when did he know it?- Kimjardi are calling the Hoboken Questioners 'meanies'!
And threatening them with SLAPP suits.
Well, Not-Stempler knew the Dendrite case and pulled up the decision for me. Oh boy...
In the case law these morons cited to scare and intimidate we reform bloggers, the bloggers actually WON. That's right, the Plaintiff (Dendrite) claiming defamation LOST and the Defendant (anonymous John Doe 3) WON.
So is Kimjardi that stupid or just pretending?
Either they didn't read the Court decision or they did and didn't understand it OR they understood it but only excerpted an innocuous piece which could be spun.
Here is what the Superior Court of NJ Appellate Division Decision in the Dendrite case said with respect to obtaining that bloggers identity from his/her ISP:
Here, although Dendrite's defamation claims would survive a traditional motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, we conclude the motion judge appropriately reviewed Dendrite's claim with a level of scrutiny consistent with the procedures and standards we adopt here today and, therefore, the judge properly found Dendrite should not be permitted to conduct limited discovery aimed at disclosing John Doe No. 3's identity. Moreover, the motion judge's approach is consistent with the approach by both the District Court in Seescandy.Com, and by the Virginia Circuit Court in the America Online decision.Get that? DENIED.
It must be said that the lobbing of such SLAPP suit threats designed to stifle speech and send a chill through the blogosphere by political operatives like Kim Cardinal and Lane Bajardi- two political operatives with a long history of mean postings need to WATCH OUT for what they wish for.
This is from my terrific legal department, Not-Stempler, who offhandedly remarked that "99.9% of Plaintiffs regret their decision to make a claim or file a law suit".
Why?
Because aside from the fact that losing Plaintiff's are forced to pay the Defendants' legal fees, damages and are subject to counter-suit, the Plaintiff can expect to undergo a public proctology exam.
It's called Discovery.
- Every cent the Plaintiff has earned and spent in the last 10 years will be scrutinized.
- Every medical record for the last 10 years will scrutinized.
- All of the Plaintiff's friends, family, associates, and employers for the last 10 years will be deposed.
- The Plaintiff's friends/ associates/ suspected associates may have their computer hard drives be obtained by subpoena to obtain communications with the Plaintiff and web pages accessed,etc.
The Plaintiff's life will be turned upside down, his/her character shredded, he/she will be flayed and fileted in the public square.
Then after Plaintiff LOSES, good luck paying the Defendant's exorbitant legal fees and damages.
Hey, but why let actual experience intrude upon Kimjardi SLAPP Happy Talk?
Comments
Post a Comment