"...there is a real danger that a jury may not believe that Mr. Johnsen has been damaged at all. They may even conclude that you can't hurt a professional Bigfoot hunter's reputation by calling him crazy." -- Popehat.com
Established in April 2005, Popehat.com is written by a group of mostly attorneys. Law is a relative constant focus on the site with a splash of cheeky humor.
Yesterday (June 21, 2012) Popehat resurrected the
defamation case between Plaintiff JOHN JOHNSEN and co-defendants CRYPTOMUNDO, INC, a corporation, MATTHEW MONEYMAKER, an individual and LOREN COLEMAN, an individual.
On April 23rd 2012, Cryptomundo publicized the case by starting a legal defense fund, stating, "Both Cryptomundo and Loren believe the case is baseless. Mr. Johnsen has demanded that he be given ownership of the website to settle the case. This is simply not acceptable."
On or about June 8, 2011, Defendant Moneymaker published an inaccurate recitation of his interactions with Plaintiff, during a wildlife expedition in the Ocala National Forest. During this characterization of Defendant Moneymaker's interactions with Plaintiff, Defendant Moneymaker defamed Plaintiff by stating that Plaintiff was mentally ill and by accusing Plaintiff of carrying firearms into the Ocala National Forest.
Click the following link if you want to read more details of the
Moneymaker Defamation Case. Although you can get a pretty good review in the Popehat.com excerpt below.
America is an increasingly crass nation, true. But there are still some places where decorum and good breeding are expected and even demanded.
For instance, anyone acquainted with cryptid enthusiasts knows that a gentleman seeking introduction to their society must first build a solid repute for probity. In turn, those admitted to the drawing-rooms and salons of the cryptidologists know that only the most polished among them can aspire to the rarefied circle of Bigfoot hunters, the royalty of the cryptid-seeking community. And yet even Bigfoot hunters — elite as they are — can encounter self-doubt when they ask themselves, "yes, my poise and quality have made me a Bigfoot hunter, but do I possess the savoir-faire necessary to achieve a position amongst the Bigfoot hunters ofFlorida? Can I persevere in that imperial land, where the exacting standards for urbanity and good deportment strain the abilities even of graduates of the finest finishing schools in Tampa and Orlando?"
By necessity, when swimming in these heady waters, a good reputation iseverything. So you see, when one Florida Bigfoot hunter accused another Florida Bigfoot hunter of being crazy, the latter had no choice but to sue for defamation.
Our story takes us to the aforementioned Florida, where Bigfoot is sought by our players. I admit that I — embarrassingly untutored in these things — labored under the naive belief that Bigfoot is a phenomenon of the Pacific Northwest. That, apparently, is an error on the level of believing that Duke is one of the Ivies.
Bigfoot-hunting has a rich tradition in Florida. Some say that Bigfoot (never say
Bigfeet; they'll wonder if you came in by the servant's entrance) migrated to Florida for its warmer climes and the easy supply of food (particularly in the late afternoon and early evening hours); those prone to unkindness suggest that the migration was a result of a Bigfoot flight seeking refuge from the increasing prevalence of Chupacabra-Americans in their traditional realms in the West.
John Johnsen is a raving lunatic!
ReplyDeleteMoneymaker should have called him a "Fuckhead"... According to Penn & Teller, that's how they keep from getting sued.
ReplyDeleteWithout knowing the parties, I can say the above reads extremely one sided and for a self professed "embarassingly untutored" blogger (Ken makes no claim he is a lawyer, and the website asks all to disregard any their "rantings,") he has quite an inside view.
ReplyDeleteNormally a "legal argument" of any import will also suggest and defeat any potential counter claims, it is part of legal writing 101. There is always a counter argument, if there wern't the case would quickly be dismissed or summary judgment awarded.
The lack of any counter arguments betrays the writer's goal; to persuade the audience of his view. This was written to persude, nothing more. It is not a complete or even necessarily accurate view.
You could argue it was written to persuade everyone of Ken's cleverness and the Bigfoot world's idiocy, or something more. Too slanted, too driven, too many internal conflicts and conceit...smells like trash, delivered by garbagemen. I doubt ken discovered his view of the Bigfoot world reviewing obscure blogs.
The reality can be viewed online, via public court records in that jurisdiction. You will see there the defendants use all manner of motions to avoid jurisdiction or answering the complaint.
If the "case" were a slam dunk, why bother?
Never trust a "lawyer," especially one who won't display their license.
Ken is a lawyer, and in fact a very good one who focuses his work in large part on free speech issues.
ReplyDeleteKen writes for entertainment (I think mostly his own) and maybe to teach people about the law. It's not formal legal writing, and he has no obligation to explore every argument for the plaintiffs, not that there are very many good ones.
The motions to dismiss reflect that it is far easier and cheaper to get rid of something before trial than to go through trial. If my attorney didn't file a motion where there were reasonable grounds to do so, I would not be happy with him.
tut tut lol
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRelease of a 'certain' DNA study prior to litigation might just have an influence on the final opinion of a judge/jury. Of course that would require such a study to be public too...
ReplyDelete