Trolls gain great comfort by never having to be personally accountable for what they say.
And, ironically, they’re scamming the visitors to Scam.com.
No, the thread is still there and is currently on the second page. The thread was locked on 5-19-10 and so it will eventually end up in scam.com Hell along with the other threads that have been locked. However, the Broker Jones thread was deleted today.getupnow wrote:Been away from Scam.com for a few weeks and just caught up reading the Yoli thread. Had to read it twice to get a feel for what has happened. Also, noticed the thread about Len Clements is gone altogether.
Furthermore, if you’ve said nothing that’s libelous, fraudulent, or in any way legally actionable, then not only would you have nothing to worry about, you should HOPE for a lawsuit against you! Then you could countersue with what’s called a SLAPP suit and make a whole bunch of money! Because it’s almost impossible to prove a libel charge in this country, no matter how badly you’ve actually libeled someone. I could literally claim you are a child molesting terrorist liberal (the three worst things I could think of, off the top of my head) and as long as I say that it’s my “opinion” based on how you “appear” to me, I’m protected by the First Amendment.
There’s another moderator here that can confirm all of this, after she gets back.
Like watching a bull browse around a fine china shop...James R wrote:He's currently on a rampage over there threatening several people and locking down threads.
This guy really thinks that because he as the power to ban some accounts, and move some information around...that everything is just going to MAGICALLY disappear.
Watching this guy in action is pretty amusing!
Well, no, it's the original suit that's the SLAPP. "SLAPP" stands for "strategic lawsuit against public participation". The countersuit would be an "anti-SLAPP". BTW, many states don't have general anti-SLAPP laws.Doc Bunkum wrote:In closing, let me share the wisdom of Len Clements regarding free speech...
Furthermore, if you’ve said nothing that’s libelous, fraudulent, or in any way legally actionable, then not only would you have nothing to worry about, you should HOPE for a lawsuit against you! Then you could countersue with what’s called a SLAPP suit and make a whole bunch of money!
One hundred percent wrong. You cannot protect a libelous statement of fact simply by prefacing it with "It's my opinion that". Don't believe me? How about the Supreme Court?Because it’s almost impossible to prove a libel charge in this country, no matter how badly you’ve actually libeled someone. I could literally claim you are a child molesting terrorist liberal (the three worst things I could think of, off the top of my head) and as long as I say that it’s my “opinion” based on how you “appear” to me, I’m protected by the First Amendment.
Milkovich v. Lorain Journal, 497 U.S. 1, 18-19 (1990).If a speaker says, "In my opinion John Jones is a liar," he implies a knowledge of facts which lead to the conclusion that Jones told an untruth. Even if the speaker states the facts upon which he bases his opinion, if those facts are either incorrect or incomplete, or if his assessment of them is erroneous, the statement may still imply a false assertion of fact. Simply couching such statements in terms of opinion does not dispel these implications; and the statement, "In my opinion Jones is a liar," can cause as much damage to reputation as the statement, "Jones is a liar."
If he means Heather, she knows better. Better keep her banned.There’s another moderator here that can confirm all of this, after she gets back.
I wrote "court certified expert" ...
That's what it says on the Market Wave site
Court certified Expert in Network/Multilevel Marketing.
WendyD
There's no such title, Wendy. Judges in US state courts accept people as "experts" in specific subjects on a case-by-case basis. What it ought to say is that his evidence has been admitted in some (maybe even many) cases as "expert testimony" by a court, which will always happen if one side's lawyer wants to call him as an expert witness and the other side's lawyer doesn't object. (A judge will almost never object himself to an expert witness already agreed to by both sides at the preliminary procedural hearings.)
But of course it sounds more impressive to make it sound like some sort of "official title".
Post edited to insert the sentence above in brackets, for additional clarity.
Erneston
I am glad you have clarified what the title ought to be and
I agree a judge will almost never object himself ...
jebaroo
Here's a great example of the level of evidence that is now required on this board to make personal accusations towards an individual.
Show something, ANYTHING, that supports your claim that someone cannot be "certified" within a court of law as an "expert" in a particular field.
The bar is set pretty low, Earnie.
I, on the other hand, have went through the actual process, twice. In the first case the opposing council argued vigorously that I was not an expert, and the judge ultimately rules I was. That "certified" me as an expert, in the literal sense of the word.
In the second trial there were two MLM experts presented, both were opposed by opposing council, and the judge eventually ruled one was NOT an expert, and one WAS. I went on to testify as such in that case.
Len
Erneston. You are right, there is no such title. The Court doesn't certify anyone. You can be an expert witness, but you better have the credentials and expertise to back it up.
Lady Mod
What is this we have?A Judge can't... The judge and his court must remain impartial. They don't certify anything or anyone. Legally they have to or they must recuse themselves.I am glad you have clarified what the title ought to be and
I agree a judge will almost never object himself ...
jebaroo
These are rules in every state, this happens to be from the New Hampshire Bar Association publication.
Lady ModThe guidance in the Canons of Judicial Conduct comes from general language applicable to judges in all cases. Judges are required to "Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary" and "Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety."4 The concepts are intertwined with the obligation that judges act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the "independence, integrity and impartiality" of the judiciary.5 Judges must perform their duties "impartially, competently and diligently"6, concepts requiring judges to perform their duties "fairly and impartially" and "without bias or prejudice," while remaining "patient, dignified and courteous."7
http://www.nhbar.org/publications/di...sue.asp?id=388
Yes, I bet Lady Mod certainly is!ChrisDoyle wrote:Just thought you'd like to know, Lady Mod checked with two attorneys and yes indeed, Len is a Court Certified Expert.
A few people eating humble pie, I reckon......
And as a footnote...OK, I just talked to my attorney friend and our coporate attorney where I work, Steve (he's our new Arkansas State Rep) and ran this term by him.
It appears that if a Judge approves of you as an "expert" witness that effectively, you are "certified" by the court.
So, my pardons, I am wrong. I've never heard it put quite that way but the definition is accurate. You can be a certified court witness.
I think I'll go back to politics now. Sheesh!
Lady Mod
My state senator trumps Quatloos personal injury attorney any day of the week.Originally Posted by jebaroo:
can you have both of the licensed attorneys get with ernie so he can educate them on the court system in the u.s.?
Jebaroo
Quatloos!!!! What a joke of a site!
Lady Mod
Thanks for sharing that.Emet wrote:Have y'all seen this?:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=167749&page=7
Starts with post #271
23rd May 2010, 09:59 PMHello all,
I've been a card carrying member of JREF (and CSICOP) for several years, but just wandered (slight pun indented) into this forum for the first time in search for discussions on this very topic - the Amega AMWand.
As a brief intro, I've been a consumer advocate, or "watchdog", serving the direct sales industry since 1990. I am currently one of only seven "court certified" experts in the field of multilevel marketing and pyramid schemes (there is a distinction, but I will not digress). Inquiring minds may Google my company, MarketWave, Inc., if you want more details as to who I am and my agenda for being here. blah blah blah...
Took Lenny only 1 day to make a bunch of new friends on that forum I see!Jesus, what a bunch of pricks. I came in here respectfully asking for help, and tried to answer what ever concerns you all had. I thought I was among some like minded skeptics who would be keen on helping me expose a scam. I really should have looked around a little before posting here. Turns out this board is as full of cowardly trolls who get off on trashing people, completely unprovoked, as scam.com and quatloos!
You can have your little mud puddle back. I've got better things, and better people, to deal with.
i wasnt referring to Lady Mod... at least she had the guts to admit she was wrong....Doc Bunkum wrote:Yes, I bet Lady Mod certainly is!ChrisDoyle wrote:Just thought you'd like to know, Lady Mod checked with two attorneys and yes indeed, Len is a Court Certified Expert.
A few people eating humble pie, I reckon......
And as a footnote...OK, I just talked to my attorney friend and our coporate attorney where I work, Steve (he's our new Arkansas State Rep) and ran this term by him.
It appears that if a Judge approves of you as an "expert" witness that effectively, you are "certified" by the court.
So, my pardons, I am wrong. I've never heard it put quite that way but the definition is accurate. You can be a certified court witness.
I think I'll go back to politics now. Sheesh!
Lady Mod
My state senator trumps Quatloos personal injury attorney any day of the week.Originally Posted by jebaroo:
can you have both of the licensed attorneys get with ernie so he can educate them on the court system in the u.s.?
Jebaroo
Quatloos!!!! What a joke of a site!
Lady Mod
There. Happy?
I'm all for full disclosure.
Previous Requests and Designations as Expert Witness:
People vs. Gold Unlimited (via third party representative).
Declined for ethical reasons.
Action by Fresno District Attorney against representative of Marathon
Declined for ethical reasons.
Action by Dr. Joel Wallach against ex-partner.
Declined to participate.
Heritage Health Products (defendant) in action by Distributor.
Declined to participate.
Various Distributors vs. Equinox International.
Illegal Pyramid.
Participated in three separate cases on behalf of the plaintiff.
Action by Longevity Network against ex-training director.
Wrongful Termination.
Participated on behalf of the plaintiff.
Action by distributor against Cell Tech
Damages.
Participated on behalf of defendant.
Action by Longevity Network against American Longevity
Trademark Infringement/Damages.
Participated on behalf of the plaintiff.
Action by distributor against Starlight International.
Wrongful Termination/Damages.
Participated on behalf of the plaintiff.
Action by distributor against Tahitian Noni International.
Damages.
Participated on behalf of the plaintiff.
