Re: Jonathan the defamer
Posted by Mike B. on 5/14/08
Sharon: You bring up an interesting point. Does your family (M., M., M., and E.) and
your friends in Escondido know about your email to the ACIGH where you hoped
innocent children would burn in hell?
On 5/14/08, Sharon wrote:
> BB,
>
> You asked: "Now, isn't THAT interesting?"
>
> No, not in the least. You idiot. Nor is your idiotic attempt to threaten
> those inquiring minds who would like to know what human being writes all
> those hateful words you do about the sick and the weak. Don't think the
> threat of libel by a fictious pseudoname is detering in the least to those
> who might want to actually know your true identity for all the hateful
> words you have written while hinding behind a pseudoname. What's a matter,
> is the Chicago case getting a little too close for your comfort zone, "BB"?
>
>
> On 5/14/08, BB wrote:
>> Sharon, my dear,
>>
>> You missed the interesting thread your friend myco started. He suggested
>> we all identify ourselves for the sake of mankind or something. This,
>> along with efforts by various weirdos here to identify the anonymous
>> posters (without their authorization, mind you), resulted in a discussion
>> about the application of defamation laws in situations where identities
>> suddenly become known. Now, isn't THAT interesting? What made it even more
>> interesting was my willingness to award 60&37; of any recovered damages to
>> the mean, nasty, savage plaintiff attorney I might retain to represent my
>> best interests. Proper motivation is important after all.
>>
>> This in turn opened the door to the question of whether a defendant,
>> forced to sell his home in order to pay damages related to a finding of
>> defamation, would be obligated to disclose the presence of mold. And,
>> additionally, if that notification was judged inadequate, would that
>> person then face additional, and perhaps humorously ironic, liabilities?
>>
>> So, you might want to think that over as you sign off on your posts, dear.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/14/08, Sharon wrote:
>>> BB,
>>>
>>> Have been avoiding reading your words of stupidity, but this one caught
>>> my eye. You can't claim defamation of character when you are an
>>> annonymous person. You idiot. I know, why don't you sue me? Oh wait,
>>> you would have to give up your identity. Don't think the courts would
>>> accept a complaint from "Plaintiff BB" and we all knows those pearls of
>>> wisdom, making fun of the sick, that you have been dropping on this
>>> board would NEVER be words a real person would care to own up to.
>>>
>>> You are an idiot.
>>>
>>> Sharon
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/14/08, BB wrote:
>>>> Have you decided to cease your defamatory ways? Do you enjoy
>>>> litigation as much as I do?
>>>>
>>>> On 5/14/08, Jonathan wrote:
>>>>> Have you finished the work on your black helicopter?
>>>>>
>>>>> On 5/14/08, BB wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Jonathan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why do you say these defaming things? You seem to enjoy making
>>>>>> accusations of criminal behavior without any ability to support
>>>>>> it. Keep it up and I may decide to make your life really
>>>>> interesting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/14/08, Jonathan wrote:
>>>>>>> BB, how does it feel knowing that you and your clients
>>>>>>> committed perjury and subornation of perjury?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/14/08, BB wrote:
>>>>>>>> Or maybe I needed to get some maintenance done on my black
>>>>>>>> helicopter....
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/14/08, Family Under Attack wrote:
>>>>>>>>> BB's identity is no big secret.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> During our trial, BB was absent from this chatboard.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> BB is absent again because State Farm is currently working
>>>>>>>>> on their Reply Brief in regard to our Appeal.
>>>>>>>>>
Posts on this thread, including this one
- BB's identity, 5/14/08, by Family Under Attack.
- Re: BB's identity, 5/14/08, by BB.
- Re: BB's identity, 5/14/08, by Deborah.
- Re: BB's identity, 5/14/08, by Jonathan.
- Re: BB's identity, 5/14/08, by BB.
- Re: BB's identity, 5/14/08, by Jonathan.
- Re: Jonathan the defamer, 5/14/08, by BB.
- Re: Jonathan the defamer, 5/14/08, by Sharon.
- Re: Jonathan the defamer, 5/14/08, by BB.
- Re: Jonathan the defamer, 5/14/08, by Sharon.
- Re: Jonathan the defamer, 5/14/08, by Mike B..
- Re: Jonathan the defamer, 5/14/08, by BB.
- Re: Jonathan the defamer, 5/14/08, by BB.
- Re: Jonathan the defamer, 5/14/08, by Sharon.
- Re: Jonathan the defamer, 5/14/08, by Deborah.
- Re: Jonathan the defamer, 5/14/08, by BB.
- Re: Jonathan the exposer, 5/14/08, by Deborah.
|
1996 - 2007. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.