Comments on: Legal Lesson For Bloggers

By: belicoso

belicoso — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 16:28:19 +0000

Though in the US we enjoy a very permissive level of free speech, there are always limits. Normally defamation suits are reserved for very brazen examples of false statements being passed off as genuine, but the core principle is that where a statements is false and published there is always the possibility for a defamation suit. I love how even in the wake of Anna Nicole’s death, the situation she created with her ridiculous estate claim against her former husband’s fortune has given way to an insane amount of legal battles, all of which have some root in a hope to get a piece of the Marshall Estate. All of the lawsuits involving Virgie, Larry, Howard (both criminal and civil) essentially stem from Anna’s original frivolous claim.

By: WriteReeves

WriteReeves — Thu, 28 May 2009 04:10:03 +0000

Thank you for commenting. As I said, I was reporting on an item in the morning newspaper. As I also said, I don’t know who is wrong and who is right. The Harrington case was mentioned because it has already set a precedent for contempt actions. The rest is yet to be determined by the courts. The point of the blog post was that bloggers need to recognize that they can be held accountable.

By: Wylde1

Wylde1 — Wed, 27 May 2009 22:32:37 +0000

While we appreciate anyone who will report on the unjust that has happened to Lyndal Harrington, please check your facts first. Lyndal Harrington never wrote or operated a blog. She was simply someone who commented on events and then became a discussion moderator. SHE NEVER DEFAMED VIRGIE ARTHUR and in fact had NOTHING to do with the articles she is being sued over. Her crime was living in Harris Co. Texas and that gave McCabe, Virgie Arthur’s lawyer, a way into the court of his choice. Also, she filed a police report and the insurance company paid her and her room mate in full. Let me mention at this time that it is all not what it may appear to be. First the original order to turn the comuter over was given from the bench on Dec. 12 during a court hearing Ms. Harrington wasn’t in attendence for. The final court order was signed and handed down on Jan. 27. Ms. Harringtons computer was stolen on Dec. 18. The police officer who said the scene appeared staged did so by adding a summary report to his original report in Feb. 09 AFTER McCabe spoke to him. (Nothing appears out of sorts there huh?) Ms. Harrington, like a lot of people went through Hurricane Ike and saved her computer knowing that it was possible that she would have to one day turn it over. If she were going to “fake something happening” to her computer it would have been much easier for her to do so and claim Ike damaged it. That didn’t happen though. It might surprise you as to what the TRUE facts are in this case and you might find it interesting to get in touch with Ms. Harrington herself. Things may look a whole lot different to someone who looks at it after doing their OWN research and not going by a tid bit of what someone else has said.