Monday, March 11, 2013

A Lawyer SHOULD not have Steered Cox from Retraction Laws or Shield Laws. I fought for Equal Protection, NOT to avoid court all together, but to Make a Stand and FIGHT for All Victims of Corruption, all Investigative Bloggers and All Citizen Journalists. The Plaintiff offered me a whole lot of ways to AVOID COURT. Settlement Communications ( Offers to Settle) came in Often. I did not want to Avoid Court, I wanted to Make the World a Better Place and FIGHT for the Greater Good. Retraction Laws and Shield Laws should not Be AVOIDED by Investigative Bloggers sued by those they are exposing. Retraction Laws and Shield Laws SHOULD apply to Bloggers and they should be claimed in defense, used and Faced Head on. Equality under the Law for Bloggers and Traditional Journalists is what I fight for. The ONLY Voice Victims of Corruption have are BLOGS. I want ALL People to be able to tell their story, expose corruption in their area of locality or expertise ( aKa Whistle Blowers ) and have EQUAL Protection as Big Media, Reporters and Traditional Journalists in a Court of Law. I FIGHT FOR THEM; For Their Right to have a Protected Voice in New Media.

"Call a lawyer in the unenviable event you’re sued for defamation. Cox represented herself (she was “pro se“), and that’s rarely a good decision when you’re headed for a courtroom. True, if you put in the time and energy, there are many legal matters you can handle on your own. Court probably isn’t one of them. A lawyer would have steered Cox away from relying on Oregon’s shield and retraction law, for example. She may have even avoided court altogether."

Source and Full Article

For more on the Topic of the First Amendment and Investigative Bloggers as it relates to the Crystal Cox Case, Now on Appeal at the Ninth Circuit

For more on the Very Important issues of the Crystal Cox Case, 
and ENDING the Monopoly Big Media has on 
Free Speech Once and For All, Check Out

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.