Contact: Ph.D. Steven E. Jones-Litigation

[Mr. Skinny]

True for the first paragraph.

Libel is given to established fact of purpose; e.g. LC for an example or Prison Planet, et al.

RAMS

*Skinny imagines*

Judge: Robert, the defendants have been found guilty and the court awards you, er, *cough* nothing!

Robert: Thank you, your honor.

Judge: This court is dismissed.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

*Skinny imagines*

Judge: Robert, the defendants have been found guilty and the court awards you, er, *cough* nothing!

Robert: Thank you, your honor.

Judge: This court is dismissed.

Could the court not assess punitive damages, even if is no compensatory awarding?

 

[Mr. Skinny]

Could the court not assess punitive damages, even if is no compensatory awarding?

I don't know. Again, I'm not a lawyer.

Why would the court punish someone for something that harms no one? (ETA: Legal eagles will have fun with me for that sentence, lol)

I think you have to show that it damaged you financially/physically/mentally before a smart lawyer would even file the case, otherwise, what's the point of his time and effort, not to mention the court's time?

I want RAMS to answer these questions.

 

[Kryptos]

If anyone at all seriously has a case, I think it's Val McClatchey (smoke plume photo), who has been harassed and libelled by Killtown. I'm not sure if she has pursued anything yet, but her case would be something specific and not some grand allegations.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

If anyone at all seriously has a case, I think it's Val McClatchey (smoke plume photo), who has been harassed and libelled by Killtown. I'm not sure if she has pursued anything yet, but her case would be something specific and not some grand allegations.

Agree. She might recover medical costs if she had to see a shrink, buy medications, lost work due to stress, etc.

Probably not worth going after some anonymous internet poster with unknown assets though. *shrug*

 

[RAMS]

I don't know. Again, I'm not a lawyer.

Why would the court punish someone for something that harms no one? (ETA: Legal eagles will have fun with me for that sentence, lol)

I think you have to show that it damaged you financially/physically/mentally before a smart lawyer would even file the case, otherwise, what's the point of his time and effort, not to mention the court's time?

I want RAMS to answer these questions.

Good question, again.

It is felony defamation, providing the outcome of truth conclusively against charges that fall under defamation. Monetary renumeration is secondary. Proof of injury, is the accusation of premeditated first degree murder, for an example, which seems to be bantered about within Strange 2 at will.

RAMS

 

[Mr. Skinny]

Good question, again.

It is felony defamation, providing the outcome of truth conclusively against charges that fall under defamation.

How is defamation different from slander or libel?

Monetary renumeration is secondary.

I doubt your attorney would agree.

And BTW, it's "remuneration"

Proof of injury, is the accusation of premeditated first degree murder, for an example, which seems to be bantered about within Strange 2 at will.

This makes absolutely no sense to me. Sorry. Want to try again?




Also - Any response to my post #20?

 

[skepticalcriticalguy]

How many lawsuits have various groups tried to file against the USG with respect to an alleged "coverup" on 9/11?

TAM

Like the USG's stacked courts are going to let a suit get heard. Well, they actually might let this one get heard!

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Like the USG's stacked courts are going to let a suit get heard. Well, they actually might let this one get heard!

Then take it to the World Court in the Hague (sp?).

 

[Mr. Skinny]

Then take it to the World Court in the Hague (sp?).

Based on what I've heard from RAMS so far, I wouldn't file this case in my local city court, much less a world court.

Maybe RAMS will outline his case for us so that we can critique it.

 

[LashL]

I don't know. Again, I'm not a lawyer.

Why would the court punish someone for something that harms no one? (ETA: Legal eagles will have fun with me for that sentence, lol)

I think you have to show that it damaged you financially/physically/mentally before a smart lawyer would even file the case, otherwise, what's the point of his time and effort, not to mention the court's time?

I want RAMS to answer these questions.

I am a lawyer, and I could answer your questions but I see that you wish for RAMS to do so himself, so I won't intervene.

But I also wanted to take the opportunity to repeat that this is no way to conduct oneself with respect to potential litigation.

Robert, I'm sorry, but this all seems very wrong to me. If you are not authorized to speak on behalf of the parties that you have named in your correspondence, you should not do so, especially with barely intelligible correspondence.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

I am a lawyer, and I could answer your questions but I see that you wish for RAMS to do so himself, so I won't intervene.

About time you got here! It really doesn't matter if RAMS answers personally. I just sensed he didn't understand much about law, and I think the rest of your post confirms that for me.

But I also wanted to take the opportunity to repeat that this is no way to conduct oneself with respect to potential litigation.

Robert, I'm sorry, but this all seems very wrong to me. If you are not authorized to speak on behalf of the parties that you have named in your correspondence, you should not do so, especially with barely intelligible correspondence.

Agree.




ETA: Just saw your post #13 Lash. Wish you'd have jumped in to help me earlier. I kept wondering where all the lawyers were!

 

[Loss Leader]

I have reviewed this thread very carefully and am disturbed by what I see.

RAMS appears to have no basis for any type of suit against any of these people, including Dr. Jones.

If it is acceptable to felony defame FDNY, First Responders, The US government, the victims of 911 et al, by using such vitriolic truculence as the 911 conspiracy movement, known as 'Strange 2', then it is acceptable for me to dissent. Legally if nessesary on others behalf.

Here's the first point: It is not acceptable for you to dissent "legally" on others' behalf. The person bringing a suit must be the one who was harmed. Since RAMS is not George W. Bush, a member of the NYPD, a first responder or anyone else who the "truth" movement accuses, he has no standing to sue. He cannot bring a suit on behalf of these people. Since he was not the person defamed, he cannot bring a suit for his own injuries caused by the defamation of a third party.

It goes further than that, though, because RAMS keeps talking about "criminal" libel and "felony" libel. In New York State, libel is not a crime. It's only criminal in eighteen states and one territory. Washington, D.C. isn't one of them. (source.) I'm not sure where RAMS thinks these people are going to be prosecuted.

Even more, RAMS is not a District Attorney. He cannot bring criminal charges against anyone for anything. He cannot direct any law enforcement official to do so. He has no ability to bring a criminal suit. He's not even the supposed victim.

It is the ilk of 'Strange 2' that is accusing a lot of good folks of first degree murder, and that is felony libel on a federal level. That fact is not subject to debate.

There is no such thing as federal felony libel. It does not exist. That fact is not subject to debate.

I intend to pursue this with extreme prejudice against all guilty parties of 'Strange 2'.

RAMS has no authority to pursue any criminal action of any sort. Moreover, the phrase "extreme prejudice" has no legal meaning.

That is felony defamation and so much more, and I have won on this within 'Strange 1' everytime.

That is untrue. It appears from my reasearch tht a case brought by Art Bell against RAMS for defamation was dismissed on consent of the parties. A person RAMS calls "Strange 1" sued him for defamation, not the other way around. That suit was settled when all parties just agreed to drop the whole matter.

And just so you know, I have 3 degree in structure failure (air frame), mechanical failure, and a degree in advanced visual interpertation and why I am able to do things like this:

RAMS' own website does not list any such qualifications.

"Independence Day", a movie still from the movie. In the collection of Twentieth Century Fox
"Alien 3" a movie still. In the collection of Twentieth Century Fox.

IMDb does not list a Robert Stephens in the credits of either "Independence Day" or "Alien 3." There is a Robert Stephens listed as a standby painter for the 1991 movie "For the Boys" and another Robert Stephens listed as a model maker for the movie "Turbulence."

I have the ability and software to resolve through HST a license plate number on a car at 100 miles from low earth orbit.

The initials HST appear to refer to the Hubble Space Telescope. I can find no information about the Hubble even being able to be pointed towards earth, let alone resolve a license plate. In fact, the Hubble website answers that very question by saying: The surface of the Earth is whizzing by as Hubble orbits, and the pointing system, designed to track the distant stars, cannot track an object on the Earth. The shortest exposure time on any of the Hubble instruments is 0.1 seconds, and in this time Hubble moves about 700 meters, or almost half a mile. So a picture Hubble took of Earth would be all streaks. (source.)


I'm sorry, but I am having trouble believing a lot of this.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

Thank you, Loss Leader.

I'll waste no more time on this thread.

 

[LashL]

About time you got here! It really doesn't matter if RAMS answers personally. I just sensed he didn't understand much about law, and I think the rest of your post confirms that for me.


Agree.




ETA: Just saw your post #13 Lash. Wish you'd have jumped in to help me earlier. I kept wondering where all the lawyers were!

Sorry about that, Mr. S. ~ I am at the office preparing for court tomorrow and could only pop in briefly to voice my concern about this thread and did not have time for a detailed response.

 

[RAMS]

To be honest, Robert, this whole thing seems rather odd.

You choose to announce this project via a copy of an (poorly written)email on an internet forum you've just joined. You apparently have no legal consultation. You introduce this "Strange 2" concept and have started signing your posts "Reap The Whirlwind".


My "uh oh" detector is going off.

Sorry, I did not see this post for responding too.

I'm not sure how to answer this post.

Yes, categorically, those within Strange 2 will most surely reap what they have sewn. As well they should.

I am understanding by your posts on this subject that you are quite anxious to join with me and those that are as outraged as myself. Against others in the 911 conspiracy ilk and the slanderous lies they propagate. I would be honored to include you.

RAMS

 

[RAMS]

I am a lawyer, and I could answer your questions but I see that you wish for RAMS to do so himself, so I won't intervene.

But I also wanted to take the opportunity to repeat that this is no way to conduct oneself with respect to potential litigation.

Robert, I'm sorry, but this all seems very wrong to me. If you are not authorized to speak on behalf of the parties that you have named in your correspondence, you should not do so, especially with barely intelligible correspondence.

Did not see this post to respond to. Forgive the short absence.

You are correct in your dissent and correction. But, actually I do have permission to do as I am and will do.

Thank you however, and please contribute in any fashion you so deem nessesary to correct. I have solicited this earlier from everyone-anyone herein.

Thank you.

RAMS

 

[RAMS]

Based on what I've heard from RAMS so far, I wouldn't file this case in my local city court, much less a world court.

Maybe RAMS will outline his case for us so that we can critique it.

Yes. By all means.

Great and thanks

RAMS

 

[RAMS]

I have reviewed this thread very carefully and am disturbed by what I see.

RAMS appears to have no basis for any type of suit against any of these people, including Dr. Jones.



Here's the first point: It is not acceptable for you to dissent "legally" on others' behalf. The person bringing a suit must be the one who was harmed. Since RAMS is not George W. Bush, a member of the NYPD, a first responder or anyone else who the "truth" movement accuses, he has no standing to sue. He cannot bring a suit on behalf of these people. Since he was not the person defamed, he cannot bring a suit for his own injuries caused by the defamation of a third party.

It goes further than that, though, because RAMS keeps talking about "criminal" libel and "felony" libel. In New York State, libel is not a crime. It's only criminal in eighteen states and one territory. Washington, D.C. isn't one of them. (source.) I'm not sure where RAMS thinks these people are going to be prosecuted.

Even more, RAMS is not a District Attorney. He cannot bring criminal charges against anyone for anything. He cannot direct any law enforcement official to do so. He has no ability to bring a criminal suit. He's not even the supposed victim.




There is no such thing as federal felony libel. It does not exist. That fact is not subject to debate.





RAMS has no authority to pursue any criminal action of any sort. Moreover, the phrase "extreme prejudice" has no legal meaning.





That is untrue. It appears from my reasearch tht a case brought by Art Bell against RAMS for defamation was dismissed on consent of the parties. A person RAMS calls "Strange 1" sued him for defamation, not the other way around. That suit was settled when all parties just agreed to drop the whole matter.





RAMS' own website does not list any such qualifications.



IMDb does not list a Robert Stephens in the credits of either "Independence Day" or "Alien 3." There is a Robert Stephens listed as a standby painter for the 1991 movie "For the Boys" and another Robert Stephens listed as a model maker for the movie "Turbulence."




The initials HST appear to refer to the Hubble Space Telescope. I can find no information about the Hubble even being able to be pointed towards earth, let alone resolve a license plate. In fact, the Hubble website answers that very question by saying: The surface of the Earth is whizzing by as Hubble orbits, and the pointing system, designed to track the distant stars, cannot track an object on the Earth. The shortest exposure time on any of the Hubble instruments is 0.1 seconds, and in this time Hubble moves about 700 meters, or almost half a mile. So a picture Hubble took of Earth would be all streaks. (source.)


I'm sorry, but I am having trouble believing a lot of this.

Your dissent is in order.

I am not the one litigating, only organization and pursuit, no different than Strange 1. I will be named.

I do FX by contract as I cannot be laid off this way and can work at different effects houses which is done by bid. The downside is no screen credits, the bane of the industry.

The HST has the CRSS attach array for look down capability, but not lensed through the HUDF or any other look out mod. Feed comes from HST and NASA to all contractors who work in visual areas of docs.

HST cannot and does not live feed to earth, publicly. It cannot discern objects on earth in clear resolution without ground based software-hardware to do so. It does rely on KH-11 through DoD when non streaked images are required.

Please read and consult here:

http://hubble.nasa.gov/overview/faq.php

Lastly, there are those that have been harmed and are harmed by Strange 2. I am not one of them since I am not involved with any organization so effected, any more than I am not a civil service employee of NASA and never have been.

Is that more helpful.

RAMS

 

[WildCat]