Discussion:
Implications of Novins vs. Cannon et al
(too old to reply)
Anonymous
2009-05-02 19:46:17 UTC
Permalink
Those of us who have been following and supporting Mr. Novins, Esq.'s
lawsuit against the named defendants are seeing a far different outcome than
the defendants who are so delusional that they think they are going to get
away, Scott free and live for the day when they can return to AUK and go
full speed ahead with their organized defamation. Boy, are they ever in for
a BIG comeuppance!
Brown-nosing points awarded = 0.
This lawsuit has huge implications. It is likely to change the face of
Usenet and the Internet in general.
Riiiight. Sure it is, for about the length of time everybody
talks about it. The one piece of evidence that Chucky is basing
his lawsuit on, is going to wind up costing him dearly.

It boils down to one question, Greggie, "Who done it?"

Chucky can't prove who did, and neither can any expert he hires.
All the expert can confirm is, who didn't.
Gregory Hall
2009-05-02 20:20:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anonymous
Those of us who have been following and supporting Mr. Novins, Esq.'s
lawsuit against the named defendants are seeing a far different outcome than
the defendants who are so delusional that they think they are going to get
away, Scott free and live for the day when they can return to AUK and go
full speed ahead with their organized defamation. Boy, are they ever in for
a BIG comeuppance!
Brown-nosing points awarded = 0.
This lawsuit has huge implications. It is likely to change the face of
Usenet and the Internet in general.
Riiiight. Sure it is, for about the length of time everybody
talks about it. The one piece of evidence that Chucky is basing
his lawsuit on, is going to wind up costing him dearly.
It boils down to one question, Greggie, "Who done it?"
Chucky can't prove who did, and neither can any expert he hires.
All the expert can confirm is, who didn't.
I see it differently. Atlas doesn't have to prove who wrote the original. It
doesn't matter who wrote the original. What will matter to the jurors is how
the original (which is an *obvious* forgery that is easily recognized as
such by any of the Usenet savvy defendants) was used by the defendants (who
knew full well it was a forgery and even have stated the same here in this
group many times) to defame Atlas Bugged, his employees and his business in
general while representing it as genuine and factual.

Stupid and criminal is what the average juror will probably think.
--
Gregory Hall
http://outingextremistanti-scientologists.blogspot.com/
Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries
2009-05-02 21:00:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gregory Hall
Post by Anonymous
Those of us who have been following and supporting Mr. Novins,
Esq.'s lawsuit against the named defendants are seeing a far
different outcome than
the defendants who are so delusional that they think they are going to get
away, Scott free and live for the day when they can return to AUK
and go full speed ahead with their organized defamation. Boy, are
they ever in for
a BIG comeuppance!
Brown-nosing points awarded = 0.
This lawsuit has huge implications. It is likely to change the face
of Usenet and the Internet in general.
Riiiight. Sure it is, for about the length of time everybody
talks about it. The one piece of evidence that Chucky is basing
his lawsuit on, is going to wind up costing him dearly.
It boils down to one question, Greggie, "Who done it?"
Chucky can't prove who did, and neither can any expert he hires.
All the expert can confirm is, who didn't.
I see it differently. Atlas doesn't have to prove who wrote the
original. It doesn't matter who wrote the original. What will matter
to the jurors is how the original (which is an *obvious* forgery that
is easily recognized as such by any of the Usenet savvy defendants)
was used by the defendants (who knew full well it was a forgery and
even have stated the same here in this group many times) to defame
Atlas Bugged, his employees and his business in general while
representing it as genuine and factual.
How did we do that?

None of the follow-ups contained the original text, and no one ever took
the position that it was true. I--and several other defendants--never
even participated in the thread.
Post by Gregory Hall
Stupid and criminal is what the average juror will probably think.
I wonder what they'll think of you?
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries

If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will
scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will
refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something
which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he
will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is
explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell
Fritz Wuehler
2009-05-03 03:02:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gregory Hall
Post by Anonymous
Those of us who have been following and supporting Mr. Novins, Esq.'s
lawsuit against the named defendants are seeing a far different outcome than
the defendants who are so delusional that they think they are going to get
away, Scott free and live for the day when they can return to AUK and go
full speed ahead with their organized defamation. Boy, are they ever in for
a BIG comeuppance!
Brown-nosing points awarded = 0.
This lawsuit has huge implications. It is likely to change the face of
Usenet and the Internet in general.
Riiiight. Sure it is, for about the length of time everybody
talks about it. The one piece of evidence that Chucky is basing
his lawsuit on, is going to wind up costing him dearly.
It boils down to one question, Greggie, "Who done it?"
Chucky can't prove who did, and neither can any expert he hires.
All the expert can confirm is, who didn't.
I see it differently. Atlas doesn't have to prove who wrote the original. It
doesn't matter who wrote the original. What will matter to the jurors is how
the original (which is an *obvious* forgery that is easily recognized as
such by any of the Usenet savvy defendants) was used by the defendants (who
knew full well it was a forgery and even have stated the same here in this
group many times) to defame Atlas Bugged, his employees and his business in
general while representing it as genuine and factual.
So obvious that even you could have done it, Greggie. Maybe you
did, and just choose not to remember it. There's a lot of your
"style" in that post. Sneak attack, sockpuppetry,
misinformation, inflammatory etc. The sort of thing you're
always doing using any number of socks.
Post by Gregory Hall
Stupid and criminal is what the average juror will probably think.
They aren't as stupid or biased as you and the other thought
police. They'll probably look at it as a bunch of old kids
having a pissing contest that got out of hand. AB isn't too
bright, or he would have never placed himself and his "business"
in jeopardy by playing kid games in a news group, and using his
personal info. If I was a juror, I'd sure be looking at it from
that aspect. Ultimately it doesn't matter whether he wins this
case or not. The negative publicity he'll get will do more harm
than it will good if it ever hits the blogosphere as a matter of
interest. He'll love the misinformation they crank out for
Google to find.
Post by Gregory Hall
--
Gregory Hall
http://outingextremistanti-scientologists.blogspot.com/
Considering lawyers are some of the most despised people in the
world, it wouldn't be too farfetched to think a jury might stick
it to AB just for the hell of it.
Anonymous
2009-05-03 06:42:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fritz Wuehler
Post by Gregory Hall
Post by Anonymous
Those of us who have been following and supporting Mr. Novins, Esq.'s
lawsuit against the named defendants are seeing a far different
outcome
than
the defendants who are so delusional that they think they are going to get
away, Scott free and live for the day when they can return to AUK and go
full speed ahead with their organized defamation. Boy, are they ever
in
for
a BIG comeuppance!
Brown-nosing points awarded = 0.
This lawsuit has huge implications. It is likely to change the face of
Usenet and the Internet in general.
Riiiight. Sure it is, for about the length of time everybody
talks about it. The one piece of evidence that Chucky is basing
his lawsuit on, is going to wind up costing him dearly.
It boils down to one question, Greggie, "Who done it?"
Chucky can't prove who did, and neither can any expert he hires.
All the expert can confirm is, who didn't.
I see it differently. Atlas doesn't have to prove who wrote the original. It
doesn't matter who wrote the original. What will matter to the jurors is how
the original (which is an *obvious* forgery that is easily recognized as
such by any of the Usenet savvy defendants) was used by the defendants (who
knew full well it was a forgery and even have stated the same here in this
group many times) to defame Atlas Bugged, his employees and his business in
general while representing it as genuine and factual.
So obvious that even you could have done it, Greggie. Maybe you
did, and just choose not to remember it. There's a lot of your
"style" in that post. Sneak attack, sockpuppetry,
misinformation, inflammatory etc. The sort of thing you're
always doing using any number of socks.
Yes, I admit it. I posted it. I've known 'Atlas Bugged' for years. As a
matter of fact Atlas is another sock puppet of mine. It was all a set-up to
entice the AUKer bullies to use it to defame "Atlas" while I worked in
league with my sock puppet with a law degree to fleece all of them of their
entire combined fortunes of 759 dollars and some change.
Noted.
Good grief, but you and the others must listen to George Noree all night
long while you smoke pot.
Opium Greggie, opium. It's a real hit with the ladies if one
don't puff too much.
Post by Fritz Wuehler
Post by Gregory Hall
Stupid and criminal is what the average juror will probably think.
They aren't as stupid or biased as you and the other thought
police. They'll probably look at it as a bunch of old kids
having a pissing contest that got out of hand. AB isn't too
bright, or he would have never placed himself and his "business"
in jeopardy by playing kid games in a news group, and using his
personal info.
It was not Atlas who put his business in jeopardy. It was the willing
libelers who did that and he would be remiss if he failed to defend his
business from the creep caballers.
Sure he did. Nobody with an ounce of sense would post
verifiably personal information in this sewer called Usenet. He
got down on his knees and begged for it as soon as he did that.
This is the netherworld, where facts, fantasy and fiction
collide. Nothing is real unless someone is stupid enough to
introduce reality.
Post by Fritz Wuehler
If I was a juror, I'd sure be looking at it from
that aspect. Ultimately it doesn't matter whether he wins this
case or not. The negative publicity he'll get will do more harm
than it will good if it ever hits the blogosphere as a matter of
interest. He'll love the misinformation they crank out for
Google to find.
Negative publicity from a win? The only way he can't win is if he decides to
have mercy on the losers and reach some kind of amicable out-of-court
settlement which I don't think any of the parties are amenible to at this
stage.
Snort. He's got nothing but a bunch of playground screeching.
His business was sucking before "The Post", and a decent PI will
already have this information in the hands of at least one
opposing lawyer. He's looking for somebody to blame for his own
failure to manage his business.

It's this simple Greggie, a smart defense lawyer will just count
up AB's posts for the last couple years, and assign a weight of
10 minutes for authoring each one. He will then make a little
chart showing postings per day and the amount of time AB spent
putzing around on the Internet. Real business owners have other
priorities than playing on Usenet. When did he work on
maintaining and growing his business?
Post by Fritz Wuehler
Considering lawyers are some of the most despised people in the
world, it wouldn't be too farfetched to think a jury might stick
it to AB just for the hell of it.
You seem to forget that in the courtroom setting that lawyers are in charge.
Judges are their friends. Juries are often beguiled by them.
You've watched way too much court TV. This isn't Law and Order
where a criminal prosecutor wins 99% of the time, this is civil
court. In NJ, less than five-sixths, and AB gets the big flush.
All it will take is two.
--
Gregory Hall
Bob Larter
2009-05-03 08:03:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gregory Hall
Post by Anonymous
Those of us who have been following and supporting Mr. Novins, Esq.'s
lawsuit against the named defendants are seeing a far different outcome than
the defendants who are so delusional that they think they are going to get
away, Scott free and live for the day when they can return to AUK and go
full speed ahead with their organized defamation. Boy, are they ever in for
a BIG comeuppance!
Brown-nosing points awarded = 0.
This lawsuit has huge implications. It is likely to change the face of
Usenet and the Internet in general.
Riiiight. Sure it is, for about the length of time everybody
talks about it. The one piece of evidence that Chucky is basing
his lawsuit on, is going to wind up costing him dearly.
It boils down to one question, Greggie, "Who done it?"
Chucky can't prove who did, and neither can any expert he hires.
All the expert can confirm is, who didn't.
I see it differently. Atlas doesn't have to prove who wrote the original. It
doesn't matter who wrote the original. What will matter to the jurors is how
the original (which is an *obvious* forgery that is easily recognized as
such by any of the Usenet savvy defendants) was used by the defendants (who
knew full well it was a forgery and even have stated the same here in this
group many times) to defame Atlas Bugged, his employees and his business in
general while representing it as genuine and factual.
Too bad for AtlasBuggered that it isn't true.
Post by Gregory Hall
Stupid and criminal is what the average juror will probably think.
About AtlasBuggered? - Yes, I expect so.
--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
Loading...