Good for Sahah! The owner of the website didn't help himself when he made comments about her within the past week.

Didn't she originally get $10M+ but it was thrown out because of filing it against the wrong entity?

 

Is $338k hard to swallow?

I don't think $338,000 is ever hard to swallow. The $11 million wasn't because anybody awarded that to her, it was a default judgement due to non-reply to the suit (because it wasn't properly filed).

Glad Deters won, but IMO, never a dime will be paid to Jones from this case.

This case just oozes sleaze. Plaintiff, her representation, and defendant are all notoriously low character people. A convicted felon is suing a man who runs a sleazy gossip web site while represented by a lawyer who is on yet another suspension, but allowed to practice while he appeals.

 

What did Graham have to add. 'I did not have sex with that woman.......Jones'. That dude spent all of his free time trolling when he was in the 'Nati

Glad Deters won, but IMO, never a dime will be paid to Jones from this case.

 

Kind of the way it's looking.

IMO Deters is a complete jerk. With that said he seems to be amazing at his job. He got her off when she had sex with her teenage student and now got her close to 400Ka about a posting on the internet WOW. Seems like he would be the lawyer you would want to have your back

 

There is no doubt that Deters' victories get plenty of publicity.

Another legal expert:

 

Nate Cardozo, a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco who has been following the case, said "the judge got it dead wrong."

 

Cardozo said Jones could sue for false statements but that "she can only sue the person who made the statements."

 

The nonprofit foundation focuses on civil liberties and privacy issues in the digital age.

 

"I think Richie would have very solid grounds for an appeal," Cardozo added.

 

A message left for the judge was not immediately returned.

 

Read more: Jury reaches verdict in Sarah Jones defamation case | Northern Kentucky - WLWT Home

Concerning Guru's last post. So, according to this guy, we should be able to post whatever we want on BGP and BGP can leave it up just because it wasn't the site that posted it and not worry about a suit?I don't see it that way.

 

It seems like the owner of that site left it up on purpose, one being money, and two it seems he has a negative opinion of her anyway.

Concerning Guru's last post. So, according to this guy, we should be able to post whatever we want on BGP and BGP can leave it up just because it wasn't the site that posted it and not worry about a suit?I don't see it that way.

 

It seems like the owner of that site left it up on purpose, one being money, and two it seems he has a negative opinion of her anyway.

 

So, Guru's safe...but Dusty Baker's going to make a fortune off of LRCW then. :lol2:

 

So, Guru's safe...but Dusty Baker's going to make a fortune off of LRCW then. :lol2:

 

Lol.

Some how she won, which is wrong. She doesn't get much money. When are the book/movie coming out so she can make more money for her misdeeds. Most people in her situation would rather fade away and hope everything dies down, but apparently she is hooked on the attention.

Some how she won, which is wrong. She doesn't get much money. When are the book/movie coming out so she can make more money for her misdeeds. Most people in her situation would rather fade away and hope everything dies down, but apparently she is hooked on the attention.

 

How is it wrong? It was a slam dunk case for them.

 

People need to seperate this incident from her sleeping with her student (of consenting age btw). They're completely unrelated.

How is it wrong? It was a slam dunk case for them.

 

People need to seperate this incident from her sleeping with her student (of consenting age btw). They're completely unrelated.

 

Agree with your second point.

 

However, there is some legit legal debate when it comes to website posts by 3rd parties.

Agree with your second point.

 

However, there is some legit legal debate when it comes to website posts by 3rd parties.

 

But the issue wasn't (at least from my understanding) that it was posted, it was that her constant requests for them to remove the untruthful posts were ignored.