| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Just for a little more fun.
The first one reamains the best. :-)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- As all RAO regulars know, Michigander Arnii Krooger accused Californian Scott Wheeler of being a pedophile, and Wheeler took such offense that he threatened to sue Krooger for libel unless the accusation is retracted. So far, Krooger has attempted to ply his "debating trade" garbage rather than comply. This has consisted of impugning the legal knowledge of everybody who has offered an informed opinion of libel law, making up alleged "legal principles" out of thin air, and (as usual) twisting what people say and throwing in a generous helping of meaningless lies. In short, Krooger has been unable to recognize that Wheeler is not just playing the RAO game as usual, but apparently intends to pursue his claim to a court in the real world. Wheeler gave Krooger until Sept. 20 to retract the post and apologize for it. My prediction: On Sept. 19 or 20 -- but not before -- Krooger will comply in a half-assed way. He will claim that he consulted a lawyer or lawyers earlier, but the lawyers lied to him. He'll also claim he did voluminous research on libel law in Michigan, California, and the U.S., but the books he read lied to him. He'll further claim that although he made the post, it wasn't really his fault, because Wheeler's "teammates" or "co-conspirators" or "fellow paid character assassins" have made the same accusation against Krooger. Or because RAO has been a nasty little playground for years. Or because Wheeler "insulted" Krooger at some point. Or some other flimsy excuse. In short, the apology will be unsatisfactory because Krooger will avoid taking responsibility for what he said. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------- I think that if Scott can show that his being publically labeled as a pedophile in a widely read Usenet newsgroup is libelous, he has a decent chance of winning his case - but that would be up to the courts to decide. I don't presume, as you do, I guess, that all name-calling here and all lies here are harmless. Accusing somebody of criminatl behavior or practicing a profession without a license - as Krueger has done repeatedly on RAO - are quite likely actionable in my view. You assume that since almost nobody believes him, it does no harm. Have I lost any business (or has Scot) because of this? It's probably impossible to tell. (Same would apply for Stereophile, I suppose). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------- Bruce J. Richman, Ph.D. Licensed Psychologist (signed this way because of pending libel suit against Krueger scheduled to begin on 9/20/03 per Mr. Wheeler - and the need to possibly provide supportive documentary evidence). Bruce J. Richman ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Why are you so eager to dissuade Mister Wheeler from filing his lawsuit against the Krooborg, or, in the alternative, for the clerk of the court to "reject" the filing, or, in the alternative alternative, for a judge to dismiss the case? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ He couldn't summons the courage to do even that. He's probably hiding under his bed, hoping the proces servers won't find him. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ |
Hybrid Mode
