Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22
  1. #1
    Renaldo
    Guest
    On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 13:56:33 GMT, "Roger" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Ha ha ha ha,
    >Where are you now Justin???


    Maybe consulting with lawyers if he has actually been harrassed?

    Maybe signing up for an account at one of the many News Servers
    that allow totally anonymous posting?

    Such efforts as we saw yesterday are usually very counter productive.



    See More: Where are you now Justin???




  2. #2
    Renaldo
    Guest

    Re: Where are you now Justin???

    On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 13:56:33 GMT, "Roger" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Ha ha ha ha,
    >Where are you now Justin???


    Maybe consulting with lawyers if he has actually been harrassed?

    Maybe signing up for an account at one of the many News Servers
    that allow totally anonymous posting?

    Such efforts as we saw yesterday are usually very counter productive.



  3. #3
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: Where are you now Justin???


    "Renaldo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 13:56:33 GMT, "Roger" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Ha ha ha ha,
    > >Where are you now Justin???

    >
    > Maybe consulting with lawyers if he has actually been harrassed?
    >


    Unless what was posted is false, it is not at all likely that a lawyer can
    do anything for Justin. It certainly is not harrassment as it is a public
    forum. It is not deffamation or slander if it is true. It looks as though
    Justin would have no case.

    Tom Veldhouse






  4. #4
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: Where are you now Justin???


    "Renaldo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 13:56:33 GMT, "Roger" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Ha ha ha ha,
    > >Where are you now Justin???

    >
    > Maybe consulting with lawyers if he has actually been harrassed?
    >


    Unless what was posted is false, it is not at all likely that a lawyer can
    do anything for Justin. It certainly is not harrassment as it is a public
    forum. It is not deffamation or slander if it is true. It looks as though
    Justin would have no case.

    Tom Veldhouse






  5. #5
    Renaldo
    Guest

    Re: Where are you now Justin???

    On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:39:00 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Unless what was posted is false, it is not at all likely that a lawyer can
    >do anything for Justin. It certainly is not harrassment as it is a public
    >forum.


    To tell folks to harrass his boss by telephone? Depends on the state
    but in many that is exactly what qualifies as harrassment.



  6. #6
    Renaldo
    Guest

    Re: Where are you now Justin???

    On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:39:00 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Unless what was posted is false, it is not at all likely that a lawyer can
    >do anything for Justin. It certainly is not harrassment as it is a public
    >forum.


    To tell folks to harrass his boss by telephone? Depends on the state
    but in many that is exactly what qualifies as harrassment.



  7. #7
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: Where are you now Justin???


    "Renaldo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:39:00 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Unless what was posted is false, it is not at all likely that a lawyer

    can
    > >do anything for Justin. It certainly is not harrassment as it is a

    public
    > >forum.

    >
    > To tell folks to harrass his boss by telephone? Depends on the state
    > but in many that is exactly what qualifies as harrassment.


    The people that call his boss would be doing the harrassing, not the guy who
    told them that they could or should do it. Now, if he formed and led an
    "organization" to harrass him, then he would be guilty even if he didn't
    call himself, but suggesting such a thing in a newsgroup certainly doesn't
    qualify.

    Good luck Renaldo of Italy who seems to love Sprint PCS ... which should
    matter little to a student of Italy

    Tom Veldhouse





  8. #8
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: Where are you now Justin???


    "Renaldo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:39:00 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Unless what was posted is false, it is not at all likely that a lawyer

    can
    > >do anything for Justin. It certainly is not harrassment as it is a

    public
    > >forum.

    >
    > To tell folks to harrass his boss by telephone? Depends on the state
    > but in many that is exactly what qualifies as harrassment.


    The people that call his boss would be doing the harrassing, not the guy who
    told them that they could or should do it. Now, if he formed and led an
    "organization" to harrass him, then he would be guilty even if he didn't
    call himself, but suggesting such a thing in a newsgroup certainly doesn't
    qualify.

    Good luck Renaldo of Italy who seems to love Sprint PCS ... which should
    matter little to a student of Italy

    Tom Veldhouse





  9. #9
    ben dejo
    Guest

    Re: Where are you now Justin???

    Actually if Justin can prove the identity of the poster, and can
    demonstrate harm ( I think the technical term is "Tort"). Then he
    actually may have a case. This might be treated as a negligence tort as
    "whoever" posted this information did so expressly condoning the actions
    of others to commit "harrassment". I could make a case that this would
    similar to someone inciting a person to yell "fire" in a crowded
    theater.

    "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in article
    <[email protected]>:
    >
    > "Renaldo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:39:00 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
    > > <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > > >Unless what was posted is false, it is not at all likely that a lawyer

    > can
    > > >do anything for Justin. It certainly is not harrassment as it is a

    > public
    > > >forum.

    > >
    > > To tell folks to harrass his boss by telephone? Depends on the state
    > > but in many that is exactly what qualifies as harrassment.

    >
    > The people that call his boss would be doing the harrassing, not the guy who
    > told them that they could or should do it. Now, if he formed and led an
    > "organization" to harrass him, then he would be guilty even if he didn't
    > call himself, but suggesting such a thing in a newsgroup certainly doesn't
    > qualify.
    >
    > Good luck Renaldo of Italy who seems to love Sprint PCS ... which should
    > matter little to a student of Italy
    >
    > Tom Veldhouse
    >
    >


    [posted via phonescoop.com]



  10. #10
    ben dejo
    Guest

    Re: Where are you now Justin???

    Actually if Justin can prove the identity of the poster, and can
    demonstrate harm ( I think the technical term is "Tort"). Then he
    actually may have a case. This might be treated as a negligence tort as
    "whoever" posted this information did so expressly condoning the actions
    of others to commit "harrassment". I could make a case that this would
    similar to someone inciting a person to yell "fire" in a crowded
    theater.

    "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in article
    <[email protected]>:
    >
    > "Renaldo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:39:00 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
    > > <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > > >Unless what was posted is false, it is not at all likely that a lawyer

    > can
    > > >do anything for Justin. It certainly is not harrassment as it is a

    > public
    > > >forum.

    > >
    > > To tell folks to harrass his boss by telephone? Depends on the state
    > > but in many that is exactly what qualifies as harrassment.

    >
    > The people that call his boss would be doing the harrassing, not the guy who
    > told them that they could or should do it. Now, if he formed and led an
    > "organization" to harrass him, then he would be guilty even if he didn't
    > call himself, but suggesting such a thing in a newsgroup certainly doesn't
    > qualify.
    >
    > Good luck Renaldo of Italy who seems to love Sprint PCS ... which should
    > matter little to a student of Italy
    >
    > Tom Veldhouse
    >
    >


    [posted via phonescoop.com]



  11. #11
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: Where are you now Justin???


    "ben dejo" <direcciˇ[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Actually if Justin can prove the identity of the poster, and can
    > demonstrate harm ( I think the technical term is "Tort"). Then he
    > actually may have a case. This might be treated as a negligence tort as
    > "whoever" posted this information did so expressly condoning the actions
    > of others to commit "harrassment". I could make a case that this would
    > similar to someone inciting a person to yell "fire" in a crowded
    > theater.


    Telling somebody to go jump off of a bridge would not make you responsible
    if they do so. The same goes for the obvious harrassment. Making the
    information availble is not illegal ... using it in a harrassing manner is.
    Now, if you could show consipiracy, then the poster might be prosecuted
    without having actually done the harrassing. I am not sure there are too
    many cases where conspiracy to harrass would come into play, and certainly
    here it does not (who is he working explicity with to harrass Justin?).

    There is simply no way that this guy can be successfully prosecuted [with
    any half-way compentent defense] and only a foolish lawyer (of which there
    are plenty I am sure) would take it on prosecution.

    So, having said that ... JUSTIN, GO JUMP OFF OF A BRIDGE! If Justin quits
    posting, don't blame me

    Tom Veldhouse







  12. #12
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: Where are you now Justin???


    "ben dejo" <direcciˇ[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Actually if Justin can prove the identity of the poster, and can
    > demonstrate harm ( I think the technical term is "Tort"). Then he
    > actually may have a case. This might be treated as a negligence tort as
    > "whoever" posted this information did so expressly condoning the actions
    > of others to commit "harrassment". I could make a case that this would
    > similar to someone inciting a person to yell "fire" in a crowded
    > theater.


    Telling somebody to go jump off of a bridge would not make you responsible
    if they do so. The same goes for the obvious harrassment. Making the
    information availble is not illegal ... using it in a harrassing manner is.
    Now, if you could show consipiracy, then the poster might be prosecuted
    without having actually done the harrassing. I am not sure there are too
    many cases where conspiracy to harrass would come into play, and certainly
    here it does not (who is he working explicity with to harrass Justin?).

    There is simply no way that this guy can be successfully prosecuted [with
    any half-way compentent defense] and only a foolish lawyer (of which there
    are plenty I am sure) would take it on prosecution.

    So, having said that ... JUSTIN, GO JUMP OFF OF A BRIDGE! If Justin quits
    posting, don't blame me

    Tom Veldhouse







  13. #13
    ben dejo
    Guest

    Re: Where are you now Justin???

    Inciting people to jump off a bridge would entail this. It works like
    this, you post a persons information whom is not too popular right now
    (I'll use Richard Nixon, he's dead so who is it going to hurt, but it
    could be anyone who is alive) and you convince enough gullible, pissed
    off, and possibly chemically impaired hippies that jumping off a bridge
    in protest to the Viet Nam war was going to stop Mr. Nixon from
    continuing to bomb Cambodia, and if they actually jump...now you can be
    held liable in their deaths...because you said they should.

    Is this case iron clad, no. But it's not what you or I say, it's 12
    unemployed people who couldn't get out of jury duty.

    "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in article
    <[email protected]>:
    >
    > "ben dejo" <direcciˇ[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > Actually if Justin can prove the identity of the poster, and can
    > > demonstrate harm ( I think the technical term is "Tort"). Then he
    > > actually may have a case. This might be treated as a negligence tort as
    > > "whoever" posted this information did so expressly condoning the actions
    > > of others to commit "harrassment". I could make a case that this would
    > > similar to someone inciting a person to yell "fire" in a crowded
    > > theater.

    >
    > Telling somebody to go jump off of a bridge would not make you responsible
    > if they do so. The same goes for the obvious harrassment. Making the
    > information availble is not illegal ... using it in a harrassing manner is.
    > Now, if you could show consipiracy, then the poster might be prosecuted
    > without having actually done the harrassing. I am not sure there are too
    > many cases where conspiracy to harrass would come into play, and certainly
    > here it does not (who is he working explicity with to harrass Justin?).
    >
    > There is simply no way that this guy can be successfully prosecuted [with
    > any half-way compentent defense] and only a foolish lawyer (of which there
    > are plenty I am sure) would take it on prosecution.
    >
    > So, having said that ... JUSTIN, GO JUMP OFF OF A BRIDGE! If Justin quits
    > posting, don't blame me
    >
    > Tom Veldhouse
    >
    >
    >
    >


    [posted via phonescoop.com]



  14. #14
    ben dejo
    Guest

    Re: Where are you now Justin???

    Inciting people to jump off a bridge would entail this. It works like
    this, you post a persons information whom is not too popular right now
    (I'll use Richard Nixon, he's dead so who is it going to hurt, but it
    could be anyone who is alive) and you convince enough gullible, pissed
    off, and possibly chemically impaired hippies that jumping off a bridge
    in protest to the Viet Nam war was going to stop Mr. Nixon from
    continuing to bomb Cambodia, and if they actually jump...now you can be
    held liable in their deaths...because you said they should.

    Is this case iron clad, no. But it's not what you or I say, it's 12
    unemployed people who couldn't get out of jury duty.

    "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in article
    <[email protected]>:
    >
    > "ben dejo" <direcciˇ[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > Actually if Justin can prove the identity of the poster, and can
    > > demonstrate harm ( I think the technical term is "Tort"). Then he
    > > actually may have a case. This might be treated as a negligence tort as
    > > "whoever" posted this information did so expressly condoning the actions
    > > of others to commit "harrassment". I could make a case that this would
    > > similar to someone inciting a person to yell "fire" in a crowded
    > > theater.

    >
    > Telling somebody to go jump off of a bridge would not make you responsible
    > if they do so. The same goes for the obvious harrassment. Making the
    > information availble is not illegal ... using it in a harrassing manner is.
    > Now, if you could show consipiracy, then the poster might be prosecuted
    > without having actually done the harrassing. I am not sure there are too
    > many cases where conspiracy to harrass would come into play, and certainly
    > here it does not (who is he working explicity with to harrass Justin?).
    >
    > There is simply no way that this guy can be successfully prosecuted [with
    > any half-way compentent defense] and only a foolish lawyer (of which there
    > are plenty I am sure) would take it on prosecution.
    >
    > So, having said that ... JUSTIN, GO JUMP OFF OF A BRIDGE! If Justin quits
    > posting, don't blame me
    >
    > Tom Veldhouse
    >
    >
    >
    >


    [posted via phonescoop.com]



  15. #15
    Renaldo
    Guest

    Re: Where are you now Justin???

    On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 14:03:48 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Making the
    >information availble is not illegal ... using it in a harrassing manner is.


    Yes but the poster (In another post Identified) did more than just
    post phone numbers. They also said: "I suggest everyone in the
    newsgroup call him up". I think most groups of 12 folks would call
    that incitement.

    It seems a double standard to object to Justins' posts, and then
    defend the "Anonymous" post as free speech.

    If you want to allow the "Anonymous" post under the free speech,
    anything goes on USENET theory, then all of Justins posts are fine and
    dandy.

    If you want these cellular newgroups a tad closer to what might be
    found in a moderated news group then you ought to be somewhat more
    Fair and Balanced in what you object to.




  • Similar Threads




  • Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast