#florida lawyer available | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

carriesthewind · 2 years

Text

*Sigh.*

So Flamethrower, the writer I have previously discussed in these analyses, has apparently decided to escalate her claims against the OTW, and also to explicitly threaten legal action against other individuals who have made accusations about her behavior.* This is very funny, in large part because, as I noted previously, she appears to have a habit of sprinkling her writing with legal terms and pseudo-legalese without actually understanding it. Her threats to pursue legal action are hilarious in their obnoxious mix of unearned confidence, self-righteous victimhood, and legal incompetence. We are going to go through her letter and point and laugh, and then we are going to get serious and discuss what purpose posting this letter actually serves.

*She does not name these individuals or identify their “accusations” in her letter, but based on the context it appears she is referring to individuals who documented her violations of AO3’s terms of service, accused her of racism and antisemitism, and (probably primarily) the individual who accused her of serious interpersonal abuse, as well as other individuals who have backed up those allegations and made further allegations of misconduct and abusive behavior.

(Please note: I am going to be discussing a number of legal issues while analyzing this letter. Nothing in this post is intended to be or should be construed as legal advice. Furthermore, I do not have specific expertise in Florida law - if someone who is more familiar with practicing in that state wants to chime in, I would be happy to make additions to this post.)

Always nice to start out with a grammatically incorrect salutation.

“I will be speaking to my lawyer” translates to, “I have not spoken to a lawyer.” It is generally a good idea, if you are going to make legal threats, especially legal threats against an organization with a vigorous legal department, ESPECIALLY if you then post those legal threats publicly, to speak to a lawyer before sending/posting anything.

In addition, “my lawyer” is interesting phrasing here. Generally, if you are referring to “my lawyer,” you are referring to a lawyer you have already retained (i.e. paid or promised to pay). If she has indeed already retained a lawyer, 1) it would seem to indicate she has significant funds available, 2) she has hired a scammer or a fool who thinks they can successfully get money out of the OTW, or 3) she has hired a biased friend who is working for free or a discount. And 4), either her attorney has foolishly given her the go ahead to both send this letter and post it publicly (which does not say much for that lawyer’s competence), or she is already working to undermine her attorney, possibly explicitly against that attorney’s advice. Alternatively, she’s deliberately misrepresenting the situation to make it seem like she has already found an attorney to pursue her cases when in fact she has not.

Now, in her second sentence, Flamethrower throws out some legal terms (slander, libel, and harassment) which she appears to be positioning as her legal claims against the OTW. The way she uses those terms, however, in both this sentence and throughout the letter, are going to require some unpacking.

First, there is no reason to separate libel and slander in this letter. They are two different forms of defamation, and while distinguishing which (or both) she is asserting would be important when filing a complaint,* there is no reason to not just say “defamation” here. It seems to indicate a mindset of “more legal words = good.”

*Since she at no point gives details as to what claims published or republished by the OTW are actually allegedly defamatory, it is possible that at some future date she could claim that some person she wants to sue expressed defamation verbally, as well as claiming they published defamatory claims on Fanlore.

Second, we need to talk about the ostensible purpose of sending a letter like this. Being extremely generous, we can call this an attempt by Flamethrower at a pre-litigation demand letter.* As part of a demand letter, a potential plaintiff generally needs to be able articulate the legal basis for the lawsuit or legal claim clearly enough to be actually claiming some potential cause of action** and demanding certain remedial action by the recipient.

*To quote from Cornell’s Legal Information Institute, “A demand letter is a letter, usually written by an attorney on a client’s behalf, outlining the dispute between the two opposing parties and demanding that the recipient of the letter take or cease a certain action…Demand letters usually state the harm the client has suffered, the relief they request and may threaten the sender’s intent to accelerate the dispute via a lawsuit if the recipient does not respond according.”

**In order to sue someone, you need to have a thing called a “cause of action.” A cause of action is, to quote again from Cornell’s LII, “a set of predefined factual elements that allow for a legal remedy.” What does that mean? It means to pursue a civil lawsuit, you need two things: (1) you need to be able to show that certain facts exist, and (2) that the law provides you with a legal remedy (damages, injunctive relief, etc.) if those facts exist.

So here, Flamethrower appears to be articulating that she plans to pursue (or, well, plans to discuss maybe potentially pursuing) two causes of action against the OTW - defamation and harassment.

But here’s the problem. Because of the way the legal system works in the USA, causes of action vary from state to state. If you want to sue someone for a particular cause of action in a particular state, first you need to make sure that the thing you are claiming the potential defendant did is actually something you can sue them for in the state you are suing. Flamethrower, by her own account, lives in Florida, and plans (or is claiming to plan) to file her legal action in Florida.* And while a claim of defamation is a cause of action in Florida, “harassment,” generally, is not. You can’t sue someone for “harassment” in Florida.**

*I am not going to address any of the potential issues with jurisdiction, venue, or choice of law that would certainly arise should the writer actually attempt to file a lawsuit against the OTW, given the specific provisions regarding those issues in the OTW's ToS. While these things would be extremely relevant to the viability and process of any actual lawsuit, this isn’t a serious legal threat, so analyzing them would be a pointless and boring diversion. I only mention them to highlight how non-serious this legal “threat” is.

**Generally speaking, if you want to scare someone with a bullshit threat full of pseudo-legalese, you will get further if you google “can I sue someone for “X” in “state” first, or you might end up embarrassing yourself.

Now that said, while Flamethrower clearly, just based on these first two sentences, has no idea what she’s talking about, we are going to be extremely generous. While you can’t sue someone for “harassment” in Florida, you can sue for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED), and it is possible that the “outrageous conduct” underlying an IIED claim could include harassment. We will give her the massive benefit of the doubt and assume that when she is threatening to sue the OTW for harassment, she actually means she is threatening to sue them for IIED.

So, let’s see if she articulates what OTW has done that may constitute defamation or IIED. If she does, we can analyze the elements of those claims to see if she might have a viable cause of action against the OTW.

*SIGH*

(And just to be clear before we proceed - I am not cutting anything out. There is more to her letter below these paragraphs, but these two paragraphs are the full sum and substance of her claims against the OTW as articulated in this letter.)

We are going to start by breezing right by the truly incredible phrase, “harboring a Fanlore page,” other than to note again the inappropriate use of a pseudo-legal term for no other apparent reason than to try to boost her credibility and make the letter sound more “legal,” as well as the inappropriate use of “slander” to refer to a written wiki page. Instead, we are just going to see if there is anything in here to support a claim of defamation or of IIED. We are also going to be extremely generous in our analysis, and not require that she show, at this stage, some evidence of every element (e.g. I’m going to ignore the complete lack of claim of any damages due to any conduct by the OTW (or by anyone else), which would be an essential element to both these claims).

Flamethrower’s entire claim in this letter against OTW is that they have included, in a wiki page about Flamethrower, “allegations” and “falsehoods.” Unfortunately for us, Flamethrower fails to specifically identify any false claims on her Fanlore page. This is fatal both to her claim insofar as this letter is concerned and to our ability to analyze the viability of her planned litigation (or rather, the plan she might make after actually talking to a lawyer). Instead, since I am not going to go through the elements of defamation for every sentence on her page, I’m just going to describe the elements of defamation and then talk about her Fanlore page in broad terms. Should she actually give specifics for her claim at a later date, I will review her allegations at that point.

Broadly speaking, a defamation claim contains five elements: (1) a false statement purporting to be factual, (2) about the plaintiff, (3) communicated to a third party, (4) negligence in stating (or repeating or republishing) the fact, and (5) some damage or harm done as a result of the false statement. (This can be complicated in various ways and can vary from state to state, and the mens rea is different if the plaintiff is a public figure. But we are keeping this VERY basic for the purposes of this analysis.) As I already stated, we are going to ignore her failure to state any damages, and there is no debate that the information on the page is about Flamethrower and communicated to third parties.

So then, is any of her Fanlore page potentially false statements purporting to be factual? And if so, was OTW negligent in publishing (or republishing) them? Well, again, I’m not going to go through every single line of the page. But looking at the page as a whole, it seems like there would be serious problems with any attempt to claim defamation. First, many (if not most) of the statements on the page are clearly opinions. E.g., when the page refers to “the use of antisemitic jokes in Flamethrower's Harry Potter series "Of a Linear Circle”,” the question of whether the jokes were antisemitic is, legally speaking, a matter of opinion. Second, when the page makes factual claims (e.g. stating that Flamethrower said a quote or took an action), it generally links to clear evidence supporting that claim. Finally, while the page does contain a number of unsupported claims by mostly anonymous or pseudonymous individuals, these are either clearly marked as allegations or are contained in a section entitled “Reaction from other fans.” In order to try to use those claims to support a defamation suit against the OTW, Flamethrower would have to argue that those clearly marked allegations and reactions were published in such a way that the OTW was actually presenting them as factual (and that they were, in fact, false).

Furthermore, it’s worth noting here that while Flamethrower complains about the fact that her page is admin-locked, a review of the history of the page shows it was locked in order to *protect* Flamethrower, potentially cutting against any argument of negligence on the part of the OTW *even if* the page contains false factual statements.

That is to say, she included evidence that appears to undermine her own claim in her letter for absolutely no reason (no legal cause of action is created if a user-edited wiki admin-locks a page to protect the subject of that page).

Before we move on, let’s take a quick look at IIED. There are four elements of IIED in Florida: (1) whether a defendant engaged in “extreme and outrageous conduct,” (2) either intending to cause severe emotional distress or with reckless disregard for the high probability of causing severe emotional distress, (3) the plaintiff experienced severe emotional distress, and (4) the extreme and outrageous conduct was a legal cause of the severe emotional distress. Under Florida law, “extreme and outrageous conduct,” to quote the Florida Bar’s civil jury instructions, “is behavior, which, under the circumstances, goes beyond all possible bounds of decency and is regarded as shocking, atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.” While again, harassment might rise to this level of conduct, Flamethrower has utterly failed to allege any actual instances of harassment (or any other specific action) committed by the OTW (or by anyone else) that appear to rise to this level. Furthermore, once again, her own inclusion of the fact that her page is admin-locked would undermine her claim, since locking the page to prevent it from “veer[ing] into attack page territory” cuts directly against the necessary mens rea for an IIED claim. And again, while I’m going to be generous and ignore the fact that for now, she failed to state her actual damages, I will note for the benefit of those reading along that “severe emotional distress” isn’t just feeling bad; to quote again from the Florida Bar’s civil jury instructions, it is emotional distress that is so severe that “it is of such intensity or duration that no ordinary person should be expected to endure it.”

The first thing Flamethrower should discuss with her lawyer is whether or not she actually has a potentially viable case, before she thinks about sending additional letters.

Also, at no point does she say what she wants the OTW to actually Cease and Desist *doing*. Presumably she will say so in her Cease and Desist letter (should one actually be sent), but then what is the point of this letter? All she says is that the OTW “willing participated in a harassment campaign” but as we went through above, she doesn’t say why or how, other than having a page that includes reports of (some of) the allegations against her.

But here we come to the second attempt at a legal threat in this letter - not only is she threatening to sue the OTW, she is threatening to report the OTW for criminal harassment. Now, she is correct that harassment is a crime in Florida. Its definition and punishment is contained within Florida’s more general stalking charge (Fla. Stat. § 784.048). So let’s look at the relevant sections from that statute.

(Section (1)(c) is about threats and isn’t relevant here, as no threats against Flamethrower are contained in the OTW page or alleged to have occurred at any point.)

Does anything Flamethrower accuses the OTW of doing rise to the level of Harassment or Cyberstalking as used in this statute? NO! Clearly not! I could break down all the elements in detail, but the most important thing is that the course of conduct and/or communication that is alleged to be harassment must serve “no legitimate purpose.” Documenting allegations against Flamethrower and the reactions by the community may not serve a purpose that Flamethrower likes or agrees with, but they serve a legally legitimate purpose. In addition, while I can’t speak to whether any individual prosecutor’s offices in Florida may choose to “prosecute out of state offenders regarding this violation of the law,” that’s not really the relevant issue here? Because private citizens like Flamethrower are free to *report* what she believes to be a harassment crime to the authorities, but she cannot make them prosecute such an offense. Ultimately, even if she attempts to report the OTW for harassment for, again, keeping a wiki page documenting allegations against her and reactions by fans to those allegations, it will be up to the state to decide whether to pursue a case.*

(*Some states do allow individuals to file criminal complaints, but the prosecutor’s office will almost always still review those complaints and will be responsible for deciding whether to pursue or drop those cases. Regardless, Florida is not such a state and only the State may file criminal charges in Florida.)

That’s not the way any of this works! While a corporation can be charged with crimes, you can’t get an injunction for protective relief against a corporation the same way you can against an individual for things like harassment. Instead, if you bring a civil suit, you can request a temporary restraining order during the pendency of the suit, and can request injunctive relief if you win the civil case. So even if she were to seek (not deliver - you need to seek an injunction and have it granted before you can get it delivered) an injunction against the OTW, it would not be the first step toward anything; it would be several steps after filing a lawsuit. And again, Flamethrower cannot “fil[e] criminal harassment charges” against the OTW; only the State can file such charges.

Now, there is something else going on in this paragraph, and another kind of injunctive relief Flamethrower may be referring to seeking, not against the OTW, but against those other unnamed “participating harassment [sic] parties.” But we will set that aside for the moment and come back to it later.

Flamethrower has included her name in the sign-off of her publicly posted letter, but in the interests of avoiding bad-faith accusations of sharing her personal information, I will not include it here. Rather, I want to end this section by pointing out that although she says she hopes “this matter can otherwise be resolved swiftly,” she doesn’t provide any request or demand to the OTW that would indicate how it could be resolved! I called this a pre-litigation demand letter, but such a letter (1) needs to state a claim or harm, which as we’ve discussed, she doesn’t, and (2) needs to demand some action, and Flamethrower doesn’t do that anywhere in this letter! She doesn’t even ask the OTW to remove or hide her Fanlore page! This isn’t really a demand letter, because it’s not demanding any action. The OTW couldn’t respond to her request to “resolve” the matter even if they wanted to, because she doesn’t request anything!

So now that we have pointed and laughed, let’s get serious and look at what purposes this letter could *actually* be serving. Although it is ostensibly written to the OTW, as discussed, it doesn’t demand any action from the OTW or point to any specific thing the OTW allegedly did; it just expresses anger that the OTW republished unspecified “allegations” and “accusations” that were allegedly part of a “group-led harassment” campaign. And Flamethrower didn’t just send this letter to the OTW; she published it publicly, on her blog. While I cannot know what is in Flamethrower’s mind, we can make some reasonable guesses as to the letter’s real purposes, based on its content and context.

The actual purpose of posting a letter like this is twofold, with two different audiences. One audience is her current True Believers, followers, and friends. The other audience is those other unnamed “participating harassment [sic] parties” we set aside earlier.

The purpose at letter like this serves to her current followers and friends is to reinforce both her victimhood and her authority. While her misuse of legal terms and pseudo-legalese is hilarious to anyone with minimal legal knowledge and is reading the letter with any degree of skepticism, for people who are already inclined to believe or trust her because she is their friend or they are a fan of her work, the use of these terms can make her seem more authoritative. Legal rights and issues are complicated, frequently obtuse, and many, if not most, people don’t fully understand them. People who use legal language confidently (even if they do not do so correctly) can use it to gain a veneer of intelligence* and expertise.

*Please note: I am only noting the assumed cultural connection between intelligence and use of legal language, not endorsing this assumption; the ability to understand legal language and concepts is not related to intelligence in any way.

Furthermore, by asserting to her followers that she will (or already has) contacted legal counsel, and that her complaints about the OTW and her other accusers rise to the level of civil and criminal liability, she is creating the impression that her complaints must be very serious and very real. This is a very common phenomenon: consider, if you read a headline stating “Celebrity X claims Y National Newspaper is lying about them,” vs a headline claiming, “Celebrity X prepares to sue Y National Newspaper for libel,” the later headline makes it seem like Celebrity X has a much stronger and more serious claim against Y National Newspaper, more like Celebrity X has been wronged in some way.

And her followers are demonstrably receiving the impression she is trying to send. For example, see this comment on her post of the letter:

In a separate posts, the same commenter repeats that the (still unspecified) accusations are “libelous,” quotes a definition of libel that they think is the “legal definition” but which merely defines libel as a form of defamation without defining or giving the elements of defamation, and says that they would personally be “happy to testify” (without apparently having any sense of what they could possibly be testifying about). By bringing the threat of legal action into the conversation, Flamethrower has successfully created the impression that the OTW/her accusers have committed some legally actionable offense against her.

The second purpose this letter serves is to attempt to threaten and intimidate the other audience for this letter, those unnamed “participating harassment [sic] parties.” These “parties” would appear to be, as previously indicated, the people who have, are, or are considering making allegations about the writer. The threat to these individuals in the letter is clear from the letter, despite the fact that it is ostensibly addressed to the OTW, not only because Flamethrower repeatedly brings up that she believes this is “a hate campaign” by her accusers, but because of the specific kind of legal action she is threatening. To repeat the relevant paragraph in her letter:

As stated above, you can’t get an injunction for protective relief against a corporation for things like harassment. However, Florida law does allow an individual to apply for an “injunction for protection against stalking,” which would include cyberstalking (Fla. Stat. § 784.0485). With that knowledge in mind, it appears that the only actual legal threat in this letter is, ironically, a threat to harass her accusers with baseless petitions for protective orders.

And again, her followers and friends received the message loud and clear. Flamethrower reblogged a post from the same commenter whose post I mentioned above, which names one of Flamethrower’s accusers (@jabberwockypie) in the post and tells her to “Get a lawyer.”

Now, on the one hand, this is very funny. Based on this letter and all publicly available evidence, Flamethrower has no viable grounds for an injunction for protection against any of her accusers. Among other considerations, even if some of her accusers are lying about her, “injunctions are not available to stop someone from uttering insults or falsehoods.” Logue v. Book, 297 So. 3d 605, 614 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2020).*

*(Also, if I may offer Flamethrower some personal advice, I would recommend that she discuss with her attorney the possibility that, should she proceed with filing litigation, those individuals may in turn file malicious prosecution claims against her once they defeat her facially frivolous claims. Again, this isn’t legal advice, but if I were thinking about filing malicious and baseless legal claims, especially when I have published a letter online admitting that the purpose of initiating such litigation would be to force my accusers to personally come to my state to appear in court, I would want to consult with a qualified attorney to get legal advice on this point.)

On the other hand, this is a despicable threat designed to frighten and intimidate people who allege they have been harmed by her into silence. Even in the unlikely scenario that Flamethrower manages to convince a lawyer to attempt to initiate litigation against the OTW, the OTW will be fine. The OTW has money and resources and legal counsel and will chew her up in court and destroy her without so much as a blip. However, if she files petitions for injunctions for protection against her accusers, even if those petitions are baseless, those accusers would have find a way to appear in court and find the resources for legal counsel themselves. Indeed, based on the above quoted paragraph, forcing her accusers to travel to Florida to appear in court would appear to be her main goal in filing such a petition.

In short, Flamethrower is attempting to bully her accusers with threats to file meritless legal claims against them, specifically so that those accusers will have to spend the money and resources to travel in person to Florida to fight those claims. Even if she does not actual file a petition, she will have achieved her purpose if she can make her accusers (or other potential accusers) fear such a petition may be filed, causing them anxiety and possibly chilling their speech.

She is using the threat of the legal system to attempt to bully people who have spoken out against her. It is, on a much smaller and clumsier scale, an attempt at the same kind of behavior we see with powerful figures like Harvey Weinstein who threaten to sue any accusers, and any paper who reports on those accusers, into silence.

And - by the way. If she does follow through on her threat to attempt to file baseless injunctions for protection (or any other civil suits) against individuals in order to harass and bully them, I will be happy to boost fundraising links and provide other assistance to those individuals as necessary, and I am sure many other people will be as well, to make it clear that our community will not stand for such behavior. Because despite what Flamethrower asserts, I believe that the fan community does despise vindictive bullying - it’s just that we recognize that she is the bully, not the victim.

#ao3 drama #little tin cults

347 notes · View notes

firoz857 · 1 year

Text

Truck Accidents And Some Common Defenses To Causation

youtube

#truckaccidentsandsomecommondefensestocausation #accidentcase #insidersecrets

In this video, we're going to be discussing truck accidents and some of the common defenses to causation. We'll be discussing things like contributory negligence, assumption of risk and comparative negligence.

If you've been in a truck accident and are thinking of filing a claim, be sure to watch this video! We'll discuss the different defenses that may be available to you and help you understand the process involved in filing a truck accident claim.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Watch More of My Videos And Don't forget to "Like & Subscribe" & Also please click on the 🔔 Bell Icon, so you never miss any updates! 💟 ⬇️

🔹🔹🔹Please Subscribe to My Channel: 👇👇👇

👉 https://www.youtube.com/@attorneydarfoor

Watch My Popular Video :

✅ 4 Car Accident Myths You Shouldn’t Believe

👉 https://youtu.be/qOCNyHi3LDY

✅ How Do You Prove Premises Liability Case

👉 https://youtu.be/31-Zt7W6nbc

✅ How Does The Mediation Process Work

👉 https://youtu.be/yBjEFCoic8E

✅ How long it takes for a personal injury claim to settle

👉 https://youtu.be/xzdST6sLC94

✅ Common Mistakes Plaintiffs Make in Their Depositions

👉 https://youtu.be/V5mB2vEIyw8

✅ Don't screw up your accident case - How to Avoid Screwing Up Your Accident Case | Insider Secrets

👉 https://youtu.be/6o915A1IG_c

✅ Unbelievable Amounts of Money Awarded for THIS Rear End Accident!

👉 https://youtu.be/cBZgwMbe4fk

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Truck Accidents And Some Common Defenses To Causation

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Obtaining Large Settlements For Your Accident Case is where injured people turn to get tips to increase their chance of getting the maximum settlement fast.

This is a general information channel. I'm not your lawyer. This isn't legal advice. It's general information and entertainment. There is no attorney-client relationship formed through interacting with this channel.

I'm attorney Kweku Darfoor. I share tips that I've learned during my 9-year career getting money for accident victims in Florida. I only comment on injury/death laws in Florida. I don't comment on other state laws.

If you're thinking about hiring me for a serious injury (or death) that happened in Florida, complete this form to see if I can represent you - https://form.jotform.com/230017382506044

If you prefer, you can call us at (754) 812-8444 to speak with someone immediately to see if I can represent you if someone caused your injury in Florida (or on a cruise ship).

The content of this YouTube channel is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal advice. You should not rely upon any information contained on this YouTube channel for legal advice. Viewing this YouTube channel is not intended to and shall not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Kweku Darfoor or Darfoor Law Firm. Messages or other forms of communication that you transmit to this YouTube channel will not create an attorney-client relationship and thus information contained in such communications may not be protected as privileged. Neither Kweku Darfoor nor Darfoor Law Firm makes any representation, warranty, or guarantee about the accuracy of the information contained in this YouTube channel or in links to other YouTube channels or websites. This YouTube channel is provided "as is," does not represent that any outcome or result from viewing of this channel. Your use viewing of this YouTube channel is at your own risk. You enjoy this YouTube channel and its contents only for personal, non-commercial purposes. Neither Kweku Darfoor, Darfoor Law, nor anyone acting on their behalf, will be liable under any circumstances for damages of any kind.

Main Office - Ft. Lauderdale (I am only licensed in Florida/I only serve Florida clients)

I represent people who were injured in Florida (or on a cruise ship). I can not represent you if you were injured in another state and do not live in Florida.

Call us at +1-833-DAR-FOOR.

www.darfoorlaw.com

Darfoor Law Firm

@darfoorlaw

youtube

#Truck_Accidents_And_Some_Common_Defenses_To_Causation #personal_injury_lawyer #personal_injury #truck_accidents_and_some_common_defenses_to_causatio_mp4 #attorney #car_accident _personal_injury_claims #personal_injury_court #personal_injury_law #new_york_city_personal_injury_lawyer #personal_injury_attorney #Youtube

78 notes · View notes

dontmeantobepoliticalbut · 1 year

Text

Philosopher and presidential Green Party candidate Cornel West currently owes more than half a million dollars between unpaid taxes and unpaid child support, according to tax records.

Records show West owes nearly $466,000 in federal income taxes from 2013 until 2017. This came after he accrued (and later repaid) a debt of nearly $725,000 from 1998-2005, and more than $34,000 in 2008, according to tax records in Mercer County, New Jersey – where he owns a home.

Additionally, West has an outstanding $49,500 child support judgement from 2003, records show.

The debts were first reported by The Daily Beast.

The tax debts have not been paid off as of 30 days ago – the last available data, according to Mercer County records. ABC News reached out to West and his campaign to see if West had plans to pay off the debt or set up a payment plan; they have not returned those requests for comment.

The outstanding child support payment is owed to Aytul Gurtas, his former partner and mother of one of his children. ABC News was unable to reach Gurtas for comment.

While it's not clear how long West didn't pay child support, New Jersey family lawyer Kathleen Stockton said that the amount of money appears substantial. The average U.S. child support obligation is about $5,800 per year, according to census data, making West's nearly $50,000 more than eight times that.

Stockton noted that it is possible West paid Gurtas and didn't register it with the court – though West has given no indication of that.

When the question of his debts was brought up on The Breakfast Club radio morning show last week, West told the radio show host "Charlamagne the God" that they were being used as a "distraction" from his presidential campaign, which has focused on ending poverty, mass incarceration and environmental degradation.

"Any time you shine a flashlight under somebody's clothes, you're gonna find all kind of mess, because that's what it is to be human," West said.

Earlier on the show, West mentioned he was "broke as the Ten Commandments financially, personally, collectively."

West's debts are personal, not related to the campaign, so they may not directly bear on the finances of his candidacy. Still, personal finance issues have been known to interfere with campaigns: Florida Sen. Marco Rubio's sometimes imprudent management of his own finances were scrutinized during his 2016 campaign for president, and then-Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's personal debt seemed to undermine his message of fiscal hawkishness.

According to West's financial disclosure filed with the Federal Election Commission in August 2023, he currently makes at least $200,000 annually. That includes his professorship at the Union Theological Seminary, where his annual income falls upward of $100,000; his speaking engagements, where he makes at least another $100,000; and his retirement fund, which earns him somewhere between $5,000 and $15,000 annually. His spouse, a professor, makes at least $50,000 per year.

Kedric Payne, an ethics lawyer with the Campaign Legal Center, said in an email to ABC News that the U.S. Office of Government Ethics advises candidates to disclose debts the size of West's.

"The federal disclosure law requires candidates for president to report liabilities owed over $10,000. Child support is excluded, but OGE advises that overdue taxes are reportable. If West in fact owes taxes, voters have a right to know why this isn't disclosed," Payne wrote.

West's associate, author Christopher Phillips described West as "authentic" and someone who hasn't hesitated to spend his own money to help others.

Phillips, who said he has known West for eight years, said that when he first met West over the phone, the scholar volunteered to lecture and spend time with his students at the University of Pennsylvania, where Phillips was a writing fellow.

"He said he could come down on his own nickel, and he spent the entire day breaking philosophical bread with my students … just because he likes what I do," Phillips said.

The campaign did not respond to ABC News' multiple requests for comment.

37 notes · View notes

justinsentertainmentcorner · 6 months

Text

Cheyenne Roundtree and Nancy Dillon at Rolling Stone:

OFFICIALS RAIDED TWO of Sean Combs‘ homes on Monday, a law enforcement source confirmed to Rolling Stone, as part of a federal sex trafficking investigation. Led by Homeland Security, the raid was carried out just four months after the rap mogul’s ex-girlfriend, singer Cassie, accused Combs of sex trafficking. Helicopters and agents were seen swarming Combs’ Los Angeles mansion on Monday afternoon. Footage of the scene appeared to show some men — later identified as Combs’ sons Justin and King — detained and waiting outside the Holmby Hills house. Officials were also present at Combs’ Miami residence. Combs was in Florida at the time of the raid, according to NBC News, and officials reportedly seized his phones before the Bad Boy Records executive was scheduled to leave for a trip to the Caribbean.

A source tells Rolling Stone four Jane Does and one John Doe already sat for interviews with Southern District of New York investigators for a probe related to alleged sex trafficking, domestic violence and racketeering. More interviews are scheduled, the source said. “Earlier today, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) New York executed law enforcement actions as part of an ongoing investigation, with assistance from HSI Los Angeles, HSI Miami, and our local law enforcement partners. We will provide further information as it becomes available,” a Homeland Security Investigations spokesperson said in a statement. Rolling Stone has contacted Combs for comment.

Douglas Wigdor, who represents Cassie Ventura and a Jane Doe accuser, says in a statement provided to Rolling Stone, “We will always support law enforcement when it seeks to prosecute those that have violated the law. Hopefully, this is the beginning of a process that will hold Mr. Combs responsible for his depraved conduct.” Attorney Tyrone Blackburn, who represents two accusers, music producer Rodney Jones and Liza Gardner, tells Rolling Stone, “It’s about damn time. Sometimes justice delayed is not justice denied, so long as justice ultimately arrives.” Jones sued Combs last month for sexual assault, harassment, and not compensating him for work on the Grammy-nominated The Love Album. Gardner filed suit in November, alleging Combs and singer-songwriter Aaron Hall took turns raping her following an Uptown Records event in 1990.

[...]

R&B singer Cassie filed a bombshell complaint against Combs on Nov. 16 alleging he subjected her to vicious beatings, sex trafficking, and rape. In her 35-page filing that started with a bright red “trigger warning,” Cassie claimed Combs punched, kicked, and “stomped” on her and forced her to have drug-fueled intercourse with male sex workers during arrangements he dubbed “freak offs.” In a statement, Combs’ lawyer said the lawsuit was a financial shakedown “riddled with baseless and outrageous lies.” (Diddy reached a private settlement with Cassie one day later.) One week later, as New York’s Adult Survivors Act was set to expire, two more women stepped forward on Thanksgiving Day with similarly disturbing claims against Combs. The second accuser alleged Combs drugged and sexually assaulted her when she was a Syracuse University student in 1991. The woman claimed Combs filmed the incident and showed the video to others in an act described as “revenge porn.” Through a rep, Combs denied the allegation. “This last-minute lawsuit is an example of how a well-intentioned law can be turned on its head. (This) 32-year-old story is made up and not credible. Mr. Combs never assaulted her, and she implicates companies that did not exist. This is purely a money grab and nothing more,” the spokesperson said.

The third lawsuit was from Gardner, who said in the suit she was 16 years old at the time of the alleged assault. She further claimed that a day later, Combs turned “irate and began assaulting and choking” her until she almost “passed out” because he was worried she might divulge what happened. “These are fabricated claims falsely alleging misconduct from over 30 years ago and filed at the last minute,” a Combs spokesperson said of Gardner’s lawsuit. “This is nothing but a money grab.” In early December, a fourth accuser alleged Combs’ former Bad Boy president Harve Pierre and a third man gang raped her at Combs’ New York recording studio in 2003 when she was 17 years old. Combs has denied any wrongdoing in each case. Still, he stepped down from the chairmanship of his Revolt TV media company last year as more than a dozen companies fled his e-commerce platform. In January, liquor giant Diageo cut him loose in a private settlement under which Combs will no longer be a joint owner of the tequila brand DeLeón or have any ties to Cîroc vodka.

Two of Sean Combs (aka (P.) Diddy)'s homes, in LA and Miami, got raided by Homeland Security as part of a federal sex trafficking investigation into the rapper.

#Sean Combs #Diddy #Sex Trafficking #Bad Boy Records #Cassie #Cassandra Ventura #Sean Combs Rape Scandal #Music

13 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 18 days

Text

Lawfair, founded by the well-known litigator Adam Mortara, is a boutique right-wing firm currently engaged by the state of Tennessee to provide counsel on a contentious Supreme Court case that could affect the availability of gender-affirming care for transgender minors across the country. Aside from Mortara, the only other lawyer known to have worked or done work for the firm is a project-based contract attorney named Christopher Roach. He no longer does so, after WIRED asked questions about his apparent ties—revealed exclusively in this story for the first time—to online accounts with a long history of posting white supremacist and antisemitic content.

“America, frankly, would be a much more civilized, safe, wealthy, and orderly place, but for its minorities,” wrote one of the accounts.

Mortara, a former Clarence Thomas clerk and current lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, founded Lawfair in 2020. While working with a different firm, he was the lead trial lawyer representing Students for Fair Admissions in its case against Harvard, which later advanced to the Supreme Court—a ruling that gutted affirmative action. He is also, according to an appointment letter provided to WIRED by Tennessee’s attorney general’s office that was addressed to him through Lawfair LLC, currently being retained for $10,000 a month by Governor Bill Lee to “assist the State and the Office of the Attorney General with complex and sophisticated litigation, regulatory matters, and client advice.” Specifically, the firm is working on a case about whether the state's ban on gender-affirming hormone care for transgender minors is in violation of the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. If the court sides with Tennessee, it would significantly impact access to treatments like puberty blockers and hormone treatment. The case was picked up by the Supreme Court in June, and arguments are set to be heard this fall.

Aside from Mortara, the only other lawyer known to have done work for or with Lawfair—and the person tied to the online accounts with a history of racist posting—is Roach, a University of Chicago–educated attorney and an adjunct fellow at the Center for American Greatness, a prominent conservative group. (Its publisher has been a fellow at the hugely influential Claremont Institute, which is listed as a member of the Project 2025 advisory board.) According to Florida’s bar registration website, Roach is based in Tampa, Florida.

In response to a request for comment from WIRED for this story, Mortara told WIRED that he was “not aware of these abhorrent statements, which do not reflect our values,” adding that following WIRED’s revelations, Roach is “no longer affiliated with the firm.” He also said that Roach did not work on the gender-affirming-care case for the state of Tennessee and was not involved with the Students for Fair Admission case. Roach’s online résumé, which up until then listed Lawfair as his employer, was quickly changed to omit mention of it. Roach himself did not respond to WIRED’s phone calls, text messages, and emails.

The questions WIRED asked Mortara about Roach concerned a decades-old online trail of deeply racist and antisemitic writings and social media posts by accounts linked to Roach. Those links were shown in research provided exclusively to WIRED by software engineer Travis Brown, who previously helped reveal that former Brooklyn real estate broker Chaya Raichik was the person behind the hate-filled, anti-trans LibsofTikTok account.

Brown’s research, which WIRED independently confirmed, ties Roach to a Twitter account that used different names over the years, such as “Roman Dmowski,” a reference to an antisemitic Polish nationalist, and “Blessed Groyper,” a reference to the name used by followers of notorious white nationalist Nick Fuentes.

The account, which appears to have been suspended in 2022, is littered with openly racist, white supremacist, and antisemitic comments.

“You’re a zero empathy monster,” the account wrote in a 2020 post in response to a Black mother asking who would protect her children from gun violence.“You are a disgrace to the human race. Actually white lives matter the Most and are the most important bc we are the most productive and innocent ppl on this planet.”

In another response to the same post, the account added: “I’m making sure my kids are white and that they don’t encounter any more minorities than absolutely necessary bc 13do50.” This last term is coded language used by white supremacists. The number 13 falsely references the percentage of the American population that’s Black; the 50 refers to the supposed percentage of all murders committed by Black people in the US. The Anti Defamation League has described the term as “racist propaganda.”

In another post from 2019, the account dismissed the death of a counter protester at the Unite the Right rally in 2017, writing: “One chick died in a car accident in Charlottesville and they act like it's Anuddah Shoah”—a phrase popularized by white supremacists to mock Jews and the Holocaust. In another post, the account complained that “any exploration of Jewish wrongdoing as a source of German hostility is verbotten [sic].”

Brown was able to link the anonymous Twitter account to Roach through an email address. Using data from a massive leak in 2022 in which over 200 million email addresses of Twitter users were posted online, Brown found that the Twitter account was registered with a Yahoo email address that features Roach’s surname and a location where, according to his LinkedIn account, he worked for four years at the beginning of the 2000s.

WIRED was able to independently link this same email address to Roach via records found in public databases and further confirm its connection to Roach. A “Chris R.” using the Yahoo address to post reviews on Google, for example, included a photo of his house alongside a favorable review of a Tampa-area housepainter. That house, according to Hillsborough County property tax records, belongs to Roach.

The Yahoo email address ties Roach to repeated postings of racist material. It was used, for instance, in a 2007 email sent to and published on VDare, a notorious site that according to the Southern Poverty Law Center acts as a bridge between the mainstream Republican Party and the fringe white nationalist right, by a user named “Chris Roach.”

Roach was writing to VDare to complain about being “unceremoniously dumped” from writing for the online magazine of the America’s Future Foundation (AFF), a young conservative group in Washington. (While Roach’s posts on AFF are now deleted, WIRED has reviewed archived material on that website with the byline “Chris Roach.” In a biography on the site, he writes that he “studied the Great Books at the University of Chicago under some really great professors … I stayed for Law School and am now an attorney in private practice.” This biography lines up exactly with Roach’s, according to his LinkedIn profile.)

In his VDare email, Roach alleges that AFF’s executive director, David Kirby, fired him for comments Roach made on a post at the paleoconservative blog Eunomia, claiming Kirby told him, “There's no place in AFF's mission to provide space for someone who posts comments and content like this.” (AFF and Kirby did not respond to a request for comment.)

Roach didn’t say what the comments were, but an archived copy of the comment section to which his email linked reviewed by WIRED shows deeply racist remarks from a user named “Roach.” “America, frankly, would be a much more civilized, safe, wealthy, and orderly place, but for its minorities,” the author of the comment wrote, asserting there is “something deeply evil in the culture of black America and the souls of black Americans.” The poster denied being racist, but advocated for “special black schools, higher rates of discipline for black students, different standards of discipline for black young people, black colleges, segregation in prisons, much higher rates of black imprisonment, racial profiling, and, most important of all, simply a willingness to say, ‘We will control blacks when they get out of control.’”

The VDare email also asked readers to click on a link to Mansizedtarget.com, a site described as “paleoconservative observations” written by an author whose name was displayed, according to archived copies, first as “Mr. Roach” and then as “Roman Dmowski.” (At one point, the Google reviews account tied to Roach and to the Yahoo email address evidently used “mansizedtar” as a screen name, given a response to a review in which a business owner addresses the user of the account by that name. After WIRED contacted Roach about the online posts, archived copies of the Mansizedtarget website on the Wayback machine were removed.)

Over the years Roach’s name, or a variation of his name, has appeared on a range of different right-wing and extremist sites.

The “Blessed Groyper” Twitter account shared links on several occasions to articles written by Christopher Roach for the website American Greatness. Roach, whose image appears next to his byline, has been a prolific contributor, writing 337 articles over the last seven years. In the past 12 months, Roach has covered major right-wing culture-war topics from opposing gun control measures to pushing election conspiracies, defending the January 6 insurrectionists, and labeling those concerned about the spread of Covid-19 as “fanatics.”

Roach describes himself as an “adjunct fellow” at the organization that publishes American Greatness, the Center for American Greatness—a right-wing think tank that has been funded by dark money. Neither the Center for American Greatness nor its publisher, Buskirk, responded to a request for comment.

Roach, as noted in his author bio at American Greatness, has also written for Taki’s Magazine, another paleoconservative blog that has hosted content from far-right figures like Proud Boys founder Gavin McInnes as well as white nationalists Jared Taylor and Richard Spencer.

An account called “Roach” was also extremely active in the comment section of extremist website Occidental Dissent, which is run by Brad Griffin, a prominent member of the neo-Confederate, secessionist group League of the South, which the Southern Poverty Law Center has designated a hate group.

Accounts using Roach’s name or his known aliases, such as Mansizedtarget and Roman Dmowski, have also posted on the gun-focused forum Sniper’s Hide and a Jeep Wrangler fan site known as Wrangler Forum.

Roach was, until recently, one of just two people who stated they worked for Lawfair LLC, according to LinkedIn. The other person is founder Mortara, who is based in Tennessee, where the company is also registered.

Mortara, who graduated from the University of Chicago Law School after earning an undergraduate degree there and a masters in astrophysics from Cambridge, is formerly a clerk for Clarence Thomas. The justice’s clerks have over the years created a powerful network of conservative leaders in the legal system, media, and at the highest levels of government.

In one comment section on a 2008 blog about Michelle Obama’s college thesis, a user identified as mansizedtarget.com said they had worked on the “Gratz/Grutter Michigan affirmative action cases.” Both cases were argued in front of the Supreme Court during the period Mortara clerked for Thomas.

Following almost two decades at the high-profile Bartlit Beck firm in Chicago, where he specialized in intellectual property cases, Mortara formed Lawfair LLC, which he describes as a “civil and voting rights” firm. Mortara has also been a lecturer in law at the University of Chicago, which did not respond to a request for comment, since 2007. In the past decade-plus, he has been involved in litigation concerning redistricting efforts amongst the state legislatures of Texas and Wisconsin. In the latter, he teamed up with the firm that had represented former president Donald Trump and the RNC, and pocketed what was projected to be nearly $200,000 in fees.

Lawfair LLC has virtually no online presence, including no website and no social media presence, which Alejandra Caraballo, an instructor at Harvard Law School's Cyberlaw Clinic, tells WIRED is not unusual.

“It's a boutique firm from a connected attorney,” says Caraballo. “They basically only litigate culture war cases (hence the name lawfair). It works through political connections.”

Earlier this month, The Tennessean reported on an August 2023 letter signed by Tennessee governor Bill Lee approving payment of $10,000 a month for up to two years to Lawfair LLC for its work on the gender-affirming-care case.

“The Tennessee Attorney General’s Office retained Adam Mortara, one of the finest litigators in America, as outside counsel and has not ever had a relationship with any other attorneys from Lawfair, LLC,” Amy Lannom Wilhite, the director of communications for the Tennessee Attorney General’s Office, tells WIRED.

Roach is not named counsel on any of the Supreme Court cases. Mortara did not respond to questions about how many lawyers have worked for or done work for Lawfair and what Roach was working on at the firm after he joined, according to his online résumé, in 2020—the same year the firm was founded.

5 notes · View notes

evermoredeluxe · 8 months

Text

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/02/06/taylor-swift-jet-tracking-legal-threat/

By Drew Harwell

Taylor Swift’s attorneys have threatened legal action against a Florida college student who runs social media accounts tracking the flights of her and other celebrities’ private jets.

Jack Sweeney, a junior at the University of Central Florida, has for years run accounts that log the takeoffs and landings of planes and helicopters owned by hundreds of billionaires, politicians, Russian oligarchs and other public figures, along with estimates of their planet-warming emissions. The accounts use publicly available data from the Federal Aviation Administration and volunteer hobbyists who can track the aircraft via the signals they broadcast.

Sweeney’s accounts fueled a free-speech debate in late 2022 when X, formerly Twitter, banned Sweeney for sharing what the platform’s owner, Elon Musk, said were his “assassination coordinates.” The accounts don’t say who travels on the aircraft or where they go once the planes land.

In December, Swift’s attorney at the Washington law firm Venable wrote Sweeney a cease-and-desist letter saying Swift would “have no choice but to pursue any and all legal remedies” if he did not stop his “stalking and harassing behavior.”

Sweeney’s accounts had caused Swift and her family “direct and irreparable harm, as well as emotional and physical distress,” and had heightened her “constant state of fear for her personal safety,” the lawyer, Katie Wright Morrone, wrote, according to a copy of the letter sent to the home of Sweeney’s parents. Sweeney shared the letter with The Washington Post.

“While this may be a game to you, or an avenue that you hope will earn you wealth or fame, it is a life-or-death matter for our Client,” Morrone wrote. She added that there is “no legitimate interest in or public need for this information, other than to stalk, harass, and exert dominion and control.”

The pop star has routinely faced stalkers showing up outside her homes, Morrone wrote, and one man now faces stalking and harassment charges after being arrested last month outside her townhouse in Manhattan.

Asked whether Swift’s representatives knew of any evidence that stalkers had used the jet-tracking accounts, Tree Paine, a spokeswoman for Swift, said, “We cannot comment on any ongoing police investigation but can confirm the timing of stalkers suggests a connection. His posts tell you exactly when and where she would be.”

Sweeney, 21, told The Post he saw the letter as an attempt to scare him away from sharing public data. The accounts offer only an incomplete sketch of which cities Swift might currently be in, similar to the public schedules for her concerts or any NFL games she might attend, he said. And the letters, he added, were sent to him at a time when she faced criticism over her flights’ environmental impact.

“This information is already out there,” he said. “Her team thinks they can control the world.”

Private-jet flights are routinely criticized for their “disproportionately high” impact on climate change, and Sweeney’s accounts have often been used to name and shame their most famous passengers. In 2022, the accounts were cited in an analysis that estimated Swift was the “biggest celebrity [carbon dioxide] polluter” of the year.

Her publicist told The Post then that the analysis was flawed because her jet was often loaned out to other people. Paine told The Post on Monday that Swift bought more than double the “carbon credits” needed to offset her travel before her recent tour kicked off.

Around the time of the December letter, Facebook and Instagram disabled the accounts Sweeney had created to track Swift’s air travel, saying they broke the platforms’ privacy rules, he said. He began posting those updates onto accounts on Facebook and Instagram that he uses to log the travel of planes used by a range of stars, called Celeb Jets. Then, last month, Morrone sent a second letter saying his posts about Swift’s aircraft constituted “harassing conduct.”

The letters included the names of three other Venable attorneys experienced in litigation, including one who says on LinkedIn that she is the founding member of the firm’s “Digital Crisis Planning & Response client solution” and helps “high-profile individuals” manage crises of varying magnitude, such as “celebrity disgrace events.”

Morrone did not respond to requests for comment. Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, also did not respond.

Planes in the sky regularly broadcast their locations via transponders so air traffic controllers and other pilots can see where they’re going. Anyone on the ground can pick up those signals using a cheap device, known as an ADS-B receiver, that is widely sold online.

The FAA allows plane owners to request their flights be hidden in the federal data that undergirds popular consumer flight-tracking websites, such as FlightAware. Swift’s jet appears to be blocked through such a request.

But many aviation hobbyists feed their raw data into independent websites, such as ADS-B Exchange, that those FAA requests do not cover. Criminal investigators, journalists and researchers have used those sites to look up historical flight paths or see who’s flying overhead.

Swift, Time magazine’s 2023 “person of the year,” made history Sunday as the only musician to win four best-album Grammy Awards, and her every movement is closely watched by paparazzi and superfans. Her “Eras Tour” last year was credited with boosting the local economies of every city she stopped in; one study cited by The Post estimated that “Swifties” spent about $93 million per show.

Her travel plans have drawn increased attention in recent weeks as she’s flown to watch her boyfriend, Travis Kelce, play for the Kansas City Chiefs, including from conservatives who have seized on the trips to criticize her.

They have also become a key point of interest for her fans, especially because her upcoming concert in Tokyo is just hours before Kelce’s scheduled Super Bowl appearance on Sunday in Las Vegas. Even Japan’s embassy in Washington recognized the public’s interest, posting on X last week, “Despite the 12-hour flight and 17-hour time difference, the Embassy can confidently Speak Now to say that … she should comfortably arrive” on time.

Sweeney’s accounts have in recent months tracked two jets that were owned by Nashville-based companies and registered to be operated by a Swift company called Firefly Entertainment, according to FAA documents. They do not track who travels on the planes or any other chartered flights.

Swift’s spokeswoman told The Post that “there is only one plane.” One of the planes previously tracked by Sweeney’s accounts, a Dassault Falcon 900, was marked in FAA records last week as being transferred to a real estate company. Each jet sells for about $25 million, according to brokerage estimates cited last month by The Post.

After X banned him and his accounts in December 2022, Sweeney opened new Facebook and Instagram accounts for Swift, former president Donald Trump, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, reality star Kim Kardashian and Meta chief Mark Zuckerberg, among others. All of those accounts except for Swift’s remain online — including the accounts for Zuckerberg, who runs both sites. (Bezos owns The Washington Post.)

Sweeney continues to post Swift jet updates to other platforms, including Bluesky, Mastodon and Telegram. To abide by X’s rule against real-time location tracking, he also created accounts that post Musk and Swift’s flight updates with a 24-hour delay.

The December letter from Swift’s attorney states that Sweeney’s actions are “in violation of several state laws” but does not specify them. The letter does, however, cite nine anonymous Instagram comments saying the account is “scary,” “pathetic,” “weird,” invasive” and “dangerous” “stalker behavior.”

The letter says Sweeney is “notorious for disregarding the personal safety of others in exchange for public attention and/or requests for financial gain” and cites a message he sent to Musk in 2021, during which he countered Musk’s $5,000 offer to delete the Musk-jet account with a suggestion of $50,000, as first reported by the now-defunct tech blog Protocol. Sweeney said no money was ever exchanged.

After receiving the letters, Sweeney said he asked for help from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group, which sent his request to a list of attorneys. James Slater, a Florida lawyer who specializes in First Amendment and internet speech issues, responded on Sweeney’s behalf to the Venable letter.

Slater wrote that Morrone had not identified any legal claim, that the jet information posed “no threat” to Swift’s safety, and that Sweeney’s account had “engaged in protected speech that does not violate any of Ms. Swift’s legal rights,” according to a copy reviewed by The Post. Slater said he has yet to receive a response.

In an interview, Slater said he thought the Swift attorney’s letters were “hyperbolic and unfounded” and sent in hopes that Sweeney would “just delete everything and do what they said.”

“This isn’t about putting a GPS tracker on someone and invading their privacy. It’s using public information to track the jet of a public figure,” he said. “This is their means to try to quash a PR issue and bully my client to have the bad coverage die down.”

#just to have it on here #jet #jack sweeney #arshia talks

9 notes · View notes

the-tired-tenor · 1 year

Text

Alright, I just received a video recording of a briefing with a school district lawyer the other day regarding how new legislation in Florida is going to affect public education and uh. It’s a fuckin doozy. So let’s talk about it.

I’ll be referencing 6 laws today: HB 1069, HB 1521, HB 258, HB 379, and HB 254 (2022). Feel free to fact check me as needed, but I’m going to be telling you exactly what I saw in the video unless I tell you that I’m extrapolating, meaning what you’ll be reading is essentially district policy. This video is not from my district and (at time of writing) is not publicly available; in the interest of protecting my friend who sent it to me, I’m not going to be sharing it.

HB 1069

This law is separated into several parts.

Part 1 of this law defines the term “sex” to mean biological sex assigned at birth. Under this definition, sex is a strict binary; you can either be male or female. We’ll talk about the definitions of those two terms later. According to the text of the law, sex is an immutable physical characteristic. Using pronouns which do not directly correspond with a person’s sex is considered false speech under Florida law; because of this, it is therefore unlawful to require another individual to refer to you by pronouns not corresponding to your sex. Additionally, it is unlawful for school employees to provide to a student personal titles (Mr., Mrs., Ms.) or pronouns which do not correspond to that employee’s sex. It is also unlawful to ask students to provide their personal pronouns.

Part 2 of this law requires written consent from parents/guardians to use a preferred name or ‘nickname’ for a student if it does not ‘closely match’ the student’s legal name on their birth certificate. <No, the law does not define ‘closely match.’ Additionally, this would create a paper trail for the state to seize custody of children from supportive parents under HB 254 (2022).>

Part 3 of this law prohibits instruction regarding sexual orientation and gender identity from Pre-K through 12th grade, except as proscribed by state DoE standards.

Part 4 requires that schools teach only “traditional” reproductive roles in health classes. The state department of education must approve ALL materials used for sex education classes.

HB 1521

This law, known as the “safety in public spaces act,” provides some definitions for terms in other laws. This is also known as the “bathroom bill” for reasons that are about to become obvious.

Defines “male” and “female” in the eyes of the law. I didn’t write down the exact definitions, because it’s basically what you’d expect. Males impregnate, females get pregnant.

All persons may only use restrooms corresponding to their sex (as defined in HB 1069).

HB 258

This law prohibits certain apps from being downloaded to government owned and issued devices, as well as the accessing of those apps over government administered networks. For now, this is basically exclusively a TikTok ban, but the door is open to add more apps later.

HB 379

Prohibits the use of TikTok to promote district-sponsored activities. This extends to things like concerts, sports performances, and fundraisers; most notably, this also applies to booster clubs and similar organizations. This law didn’t get a lot of press, so I’m expecting to hear about lots of boosters getting disbanded or disciplined over this.

Prohibits students from accessing social media (any) using district resources. This included school-issued laptops, tablets, etc. as well as school internet.

Prohibits the use of student personal electronic devices during instructional time without express permission from the teacher in the room. I have no idea what the legislature thought they were drinking with this one, because not only is it micromanaging to a ridiculous degree, but it’s unenforceable and there’s no punishment provided for it.

In summary, this is the widest-reaching anti-student (and specifically anti-trans) legislation I’ve had a chance to closely examine. It’s deeply fucked, and I cannot stress enough that if you are able to send your trans students to school anywhere other than Florida, you should make that happen.

#fledu #trans rights #legal #education

33 notes · View notes

shipwreckedwithcaptainmarrow · 2 months

Text

Captain Kidd and the Bible

Ever since the privateer's turn to piracy in the late 17th century, tales of Captain William Kidd have long been connected with the Bible. This was spurred on by religious beliefs that this once-good man had turned to a life of crime and evil, turning his back on the ways of God.

This association very much so took hold after his capture and subsequent execution in 1701 in Wapping, England. During his captivity, the "Ballad of Captain Kidd" (also known by many unofficially as "My Name is Captain Kidd) was created, and leaflets of its lyrics distributed among the crowd during his execution to the public in attendance for the long-awaited spectacle. The song caught on nearly immediately, even across the Atlantic where Kidd had buried his treasure on Gardiner's Island and been captured. Throughout the years, the lyrics of the song change slightly here and there, namely its verses, but most versions of this highly popular song included at least a variation of the following metaphorical claims:

"I had the Bible in my hand, As I sailed, as I sailed, And I buried it in the sand As I sailed."

"I'd a Bible in my hand when I sail'd, I'd a Bible in my hand, by my father's great command, And I sunk it in the sand, when I sail'd."

This song strengthened the association between Kidd and the Bible, which directly ties into much of his folklore, many tales of which state that those seeking Kidd's alleged remaining buried treasures will be unable to do so unless reading aloud particular entries of scripture during the digging process. It was said in passing legend he had actually buried his Bible, "ingratiating the evil one" or gaining the graces of the Devil himself, which would allow him unholy protection on the seas, or utilized to bind souls or demons to watch over his buried treasures. A 19th century depiction of Kidd even gained popularity titled "Kidd Burying his Bible," showing Kidd (albeit clad in clothes a bit late for his era) with a shovel and kicking his Bible into a hole along the coast.

The trope of pirates disrespecting the Christian Bible also stemmed from these associations with Kidd, such as the pirates featured in the novel Treasure Island by Robert Louis Stevenson, in which pirates under the command of Long John Silver present him with the "black spot" - a circular piece of paper that had been blackened with ash as a sign they wished to depose him as their captain. This piece of paper in particular had been cut out of the Bible, specifically from the book of Revelation. Stevenson writes:

"It was around about the size of a crown piece. One side was blank, for it had been the last leaf; the other contained a verse or two of Revelation—these words among the rest, which struck sharply home upon my mind: "Without are dogs and murderers."

This all being said, a few Bibles have surfaced within the last century claiming to have been that of Kidd's. Pictured here is the primary one, from the St. Augustine Pirate & Treasure Museum, located in Florida.

This Bible's leather cover reads:

Kidd's Family Bible. Portland Farm, Leith, Edinburgh

The back of the book is imprinted with:

Capt. Wm. Kidd, Ship Adventure Galley.

Reputed to have come from his ship, Adventure Galley, these items were former possessions of Hubert Palmer, a lawyer and relic-collector, who had them as part of his private collection when he passed away in 1949. This Bible, along with a small wooden box of the same size, as well as a mirror, were sold by his house keeper and nurse for a total of £2,900, or $3,166.65. Today, as mentioned, its home is within the Pirate & Treasure museum of St. Augustine, Florida.

Kidd features as a large component of my upcoming book "Pirate Ghosts & Buried Treasures of the Northeast Coast: A Historical Assessment on Pirate Folklore," which releases on September 18, 2024 on Amazon and will be available for pre-order through this Shipwrecked page as of August 28th!

(pictured is the 19th century depiction of Kidd burying his Bible in a period woodcut style, the cover and interior of the alleged Kidd's Family Bible, a painting by N.C. Wyeth showing pirates cutting pages from the book of Revelations, and then two closeups of the imprinted leather cover of the book)

#pirate history #pirates #william kidd #captain kidd #bible #religion #pirate folklore #folklore #pgabt #shipwrecked with captain marrow #indie author

4 notes · View notes

sheldricklawfirm · 2 years

Text

⚖️🤝 FREE CONSULTATION

- Available 24 Hours a Day, 7 Days a Week!

Any Accident At All, Give Us A Call❗️

⚖️ The Sheldrick Law Firm

📞 (561) 440-7775

📍 Florida, New Jersey, New York

💻 www.TheSheldrickLawFirm.com

#freeconsultation #freeaccidentconsultation #accidentattorney #injuryattorney #personalinjurylawyer #accidentlawyer #caraccidentattorney #lawyerforfreeconsuktation

#personal injury lawyer #free consultation #available #accident lawyer #accident attorney in florida #florida accident lawyer #Sarasota lawyer #Tampa florida lawyer #Tampa attorney #Tampa florida car accident lawyer

2 notes · View notes

comeonamericawakeup · 1 year

Text

Looks like his goose is cooked but good!

Unbelievable!!

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

JUN 10

At 3:00 today, Washington D.C., time, Special Counsel Jack Smith delivered a statement about the recently unsealed indictment charging former president Donald J. Trump on 37 counts of violating national security laws as well as participating in a conspiracy to obstruct justice.

Although MAGA Republicans have tried to paint the indictment as a political move by the Biden administration over a piddling error, Smith immediately reminded people that “[t]his indictment was voted by a grand jury of citizens in the Southern District of Florida, and I invite everyone to read it in full to understand the scope and the gravity of the crimes charged.”

The indictment is, indeed, jaw dropping.

It alleges that during his time in the White House, Trump stored in cardboard boxes “information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the United States and foreign countries; United States nuclear programs; potential vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attack; and plans for possible retaliation in response to a foreign attack.” The indictment notes that “[t]he unauthorized disclosure of these classified documents could put at risk the national security of the United States, foreign relations, the safety of the United States military, and human sources and the continued viability of sensitive intelligence collection methods.”

Nonetheless, when Trump ceased to be president after noon on January 20, 2021, he took those boxes, “many of which contained classified documents,” to Mar-a-Lago, where he was living. He “was not authorized to possess or retain those classified documents.” The indictment makes it clear that this was no oversight: Trump was personally involved in packing the boxes and, later, in going through them and in overseeing how they were handled. The employees who worked for him exchanged text messages referring to his personal instructions about them.

Mar-a-Lago was not an authorized location for such documents, but he stored them there anyway, “including in a ballroom, a bathroom and shower, an office space, his bedroom, and a storage room.” They were stacked in public places, where anyone—including the many foreign nationals who visited Mar-a-Lago—could see them. On December 7, 2021, Trump’s personal aide Waltine Nauta took two pictures of several of the boxes fallen on the floor, with their contents, including a secret document available only to the Five Eyes intelligence alliance of the U.S., Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, spilled onto the floor.

The indictment alleges that Trump showed classified documents to others without security clearances on two occasions, both of which are well documented. One of those occasions was recorded. Trump told the people there that the plan he was showing them was “highly confidential” and “secret.” He added, “See, as president I could have declassified it….Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret.”

This recording undermines his insistence that he believed he could automatically declassify documents; it proves he understood he could not. In addition, the indictment lists Trump’s many statements from 2016 about the importance of protecting classified information, all delivered as attacks on Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, whom he accused of mishandling such information. “In my administration,” he said on August 18, 2016, “I’m going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information. No one will be above the law.”

The indictment goes on: When the FBI tried to recover the documents, Trump started what Washington Post journalist Jennifer Rubin called a “giant shell game”: he tried to get his lawyer to lie to the FBI and the grand jury, saying Trump did not have more documents; worked with Nauta to move some of the boxes to hide them from Trump’s lawyer, the FBI and the grand jury; tried to get his lawyer to hide or destroy documents; and got another lawyer to certify that all the documents had been produced when he knew they hadn’t.

Nauta lied to the grand jury about his knowledge of what Trump did with the boxes. Both he and Trump have been indicted on multiple counts of obstruction and of engaging in a conspiracy to hide the documents.

Eventually, Trump had many of the boxes moved to his property at Bedminster, New Jersey, where on two occasions he showed documents to people without security clearances. He showed a classified map of a country that is part of an ongoing military operation to a representative of his political action committee.

Trump has been indicted on 31 counts of having “unauthorized possession of, access to, and control over documents relating to the national defense,” for keeping them, and for refusing “to deliver them to the officer and employee of the United States entitled to receive them”: language straight out of the Espionage Act. Twenty-one of the documents were marked top secret, nine were marked secret, and one was unmarked.

These documents are not all those recovered—some likely are too sensitive to risk making public—but they nonetheless hold some of the nation’s deepest secrets: “military capabilities of a foreign country and the United States,” “military activities and planning of foreign countries,” “nuclear capabilities of a foreign country,” “military attacks by a foreign country,” “military contingency planning of the United States,” “military options of a foreign country and potential effects on United States interest,” “foreign country support of terrorist acts against United States interests,” “nuclear weaponry of the United States,” “military activity in a foreign country.”

Smith put it starkly in his statement, “The men and women of the United States intelligence community and our armed forces dedicate their lives to protecting our nation and its people. Our laws that protect national defense information are critical to the safety and security of the United States and they must be enforced. Violations of those laws put our country at risk.”

On Twitter, Bill Kristol said it more clearly: “These were highly classified documents dealing with military intelligence and plans. What did Trump do with them? Who now has copies of them?” Retired FBI assistant director Frank Figliuzzi noted that there is a substantial risk that “foreign intelligence services might have sought or gained access to the documents.”

There is also substantial risk that other countries will be reluctant to share intelligence with the United States in the future. At the very least, it is an unfortunate coincidence that the Central Intelligence Agency in October 2021 reported an unusually high rate of capture or death for foreign informants recruited to spy for the United States.

Since Trump supporters have taken the position that Trump’s indictment over the stolen documents is the attempt of the Biden administration to undermine Trump’s presidential candidacy, it is worth remembering that Trump’s early announcement of his campaign was widely suspected to be an attempt to enable him to avoid legal accountability. Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Special Counsel Jack Smith precisely to put arms length between the administration and the investigations into Trump.

Smith noted today, “Adherence to the rule of law is a bedrock principle of the Department of Justice. And our nation’s commitment to the rule of law sets an example for the world. We have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone. Applying those laws. Collecting facts. That’s what determines the outcome of an investigation. Nothing more. Nothing less.

“The prosecutors in my office are among the most talented and experienced in the Department of Justice. They have investigated this case hewing to the highest ethical standards. And they will continue to do so as this case proceeds.”

Smith added: “It’s very important for me to note that the defendants in this case must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. To that end, my office will seek a speedy trial in this matter. Consistent with the public interest and the rights of the accused. We very much look forward to presenting our case to a jury of citizens in the Southern District of Florida.”

Likely responding to MAGA attacks on the FBI and the rule of law, Smith thanked the “dedicated public servants of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with whom my office is conducting this investigation and who worked tirelessly every day upholding the rule of law in our country,” before closing his brief statement.

The indictment revealed just how much detailed information Smith’s team has uncovered, presenting a shockingly thorough case to prove the allegations. Trump’s lawyers will have their work cut out for them…although the team has shifted since this morning: two of Trump’s lawyers quit today. The thoroughness of the indictment also suggests that Trump and his allies might have reason to be nervous about Smith’s other investigation: the one into the attempt to overturn results of the 2020 election.

Some of Trump’s supporters are calling for violence. After Louisiana representative Clay Higgins appeared to be egging on militias to oppose Trump’s Tuesday arraignment, Democratic senate majority leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) issued a joint statement calling for “supporters and critics alike to let the case proceed peacefully in court.” Legal scholar Joyce White Vance noted that it was “extremely sad for our country that this isn’t a bipartisan statement being made by leaders from both parties.”

A lengthy and complete summary

#Trump federal indictment

16 notes · View notes