Archive for has Lee lost his mind

Law School For Dummies

Posted in crime, do the right thing, illegal, politics, sockypuppets with tags , on May 1, 2012 by Qritiq

.

I’d thought they covered this basic info in law school, but apparently I’d been wrong. I’m no attorney, but I DO know how to google. (gee ya would think they’d at least cover that; why the heck is law school so gol-darned expensive?)

.

Misconduct rule – Rule 8.4(c): It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation

.

Defamation of character –  n. the act of making untrue statements about another which damages his/her reputation.  Some statements such as an accusation of having committed a crime, are called libel per se or slander and can more easily lead to large money awards in court and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed.  —Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill

.

An attempt to interfere with the judicial system or law enforcement officers is obstruction of justice. It may include hiding evidence or interfering with an arrest.  Interference may be with the work of police, investigators, or other government officials. Often, no actual investigation or substantiated suspicion of a specific incident need exist to support a charge of obstruction of justice. Such activity is a crime.  –uslegal.com

.

from The IT Wiki:

A speaker may not hide behind a pseudonym to avoid liability for defamatory remarks.

.

In Columbia Insurance Co. v. Seescandy.com, the California court required only a showing sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss, in order to compel the identity of anonymous posters.

.

excerpted from Hoaxes and the First Amendment , Volokh:

Re Haley v. State: The Haley court was correct that knowingly false statements that one contemplates will come to the attention of a government agency that has jurisdiction over the matter you describe, should be seen as constitutionally unprotected. This case, involving a knowing hoax that seemed sure to waste a considerable amount of police time, is a good example of why that should be so.

.

from nycourts.gov:

While the original publishers of a defamatory statement are not automatically liable for subsequent republications of the statement by third parties, liability against the original publishers may be found where they “approved or participated in some other manner in the activities of the third-party republisher” (Karaduman v. Newsday, Inc., 51 NY 2d 531, 540 [1980]). Moreover, “an individual may not escape liability when a defamatory statement he makes is foreseeably republished” (Rand v. New York Times Co., 75 AD 2d 417 [1st Dept 1980]).

.

A conspiracy is a combination of two or more persons to accomplish an unlawful end or to accomplish a lawful end by unlawful means  –leagle.com

Conspiracy requires less than attempt.

The law seeks to punish conspiracy as a substantive crime separate from the intended crime because when two or more persons agree to commit a crime, the potential for criminal activity increases, and as a result, the danger to the public increases. Therefore, the very act of an agreement with criminal intent is considered sufficiently dangerous to warrant charging conspiracy as an offense separate from the intended crime.  –legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com

.

Volokh: The law makes it possible to issue subpoenas and track down the people who make false statements. You have a right to know who these people are, and once that happens, they can be sued for fraud and defamation.

.

lawskills.com: “Actual malice” as defined by New York Times, supra, is “knowledge that the defamatory matter was false or it was published with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”

.

from case re CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT DEFAMATION :

The defendants published and/or caused the publication of false and disparaging statements. Defendants knew that the statements published were false and/or published or caused their publication with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity of the statements.

Defendants have combined, confederated, conspired, and agreed to make false and disparaging statements, in an effort to injure the Plaintiff in occupation, business, and employment and to expose to distrust, hatred, contempt and ridicule and to cause to be avoided.

Plaintiff asked for: compensation for the harm to personal and professional reputation and the mental anguish, emotional injuries, humiliation, and loss of dignity suffered, punitive damages to punish the defendants and to deter others from engaging in similar misconduct, as well as court costs.

case said to have been settled out of court (sealed settlement)

.

Helpful tip! — If you love telling lies about folks, make sure you have plenty of assets that you wouldn’t mind losing to them!

.

… and not a legal definition, just some common sense (umm…note to Stranahan):

If someone asks you to tell lies repeatedly, that person is not your friend.  Actually, that person is trying to drag you into some shit while covering their own ass. (Duh.)

.

.

in related news? excerpted from canada.com:

New Brunswick libel case upgraded to criminal charge

Libel cases are normally tried in civil court, but are there some defamatory statements that are so vicious that they warrant criminal prosecution?

That’s the question confronting prosecutors who are deciding whether to approve a criminal libel charge against a blogger who referred to an officer as a “sexual pervert.” Police arrested the blogger in January.

A spokesman for the police, said “when we receive a complaint … we have a duty to investigate. If the facts lead us to a point where a charge is applicable, then it is our role to follow through with it.”

The case involves political blogger, 52-year-old Charles LeBlanc. During an encounter with the police, LeBlanc alleges, an officer touched him in an inappropriate manner. LeBlanc said he tried to get police to investigate but the complaint was dismissed. LeBlanc said he subsequently used his blog to warn the public about the officer.

In January, when police arrested LeBlanc at his home, they seized his computer. The search warrant indicated police were investigating a complaint that one of his blog posts had referred to an officer as a “sexual pervert.”

Police recommended that LeBlanc be charged under the criminal code, which states that someone who is guilty of defamatory libel can be imprisoned for up to two years.

The law defines defamatory libel as publishing material “that is likely to injure the reputation of any person by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or that is designed to insult the person of or concerning whom it is published.”

.

.

Tony Martin - Actor

.