Skip to comments.
Man sues chatroom pals: I was humiliated beyond what 'no man could endure'
CourtTV ^
| 01/12/2006
| J.K. Dineen
Posted on 01/12/2006 8:51:09 AM PST by BJClinton
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-118 next last
To: BJClinton
81
posted on
01/12/2006 10:07:07 AM PST
by
BlessedBeGod
(Benedict XVI = Terminator IV)
To: Hildy
82
posted on
01/12/2006 10:20:30 AM PST
by
Fierce Allegiance
(Lean on me, when you're not strong, and I'll be your friend, I'll help you carry on.)
To: Owl_Eagle
bashed him over the head with a half empty liquor bottle.How repugnant!
You wasted half a bottle of liquor.
83
posted on
01/12/2006 10:21:46 AM PST
by
Eagle Eye
(There ought to be a law against excess legislation.)
To: BJClinton
"where offending someone or directly cursing or attacking their dignity can give you a cause of action"
Kinda like the kid that got in trouble for calling a horse "gay"--had "homophobia" charges filed... And yet the same people who defend such laws are the same who think Orwell and Bradbury are on their side...
84
posted on
01/12/2006 10:22:50 AM PST
by
jcb8199
Comment #85 Removed by Moderator
To: BJClinton
Uh, so how did these 'harrassers' end up with all this personal info (e.g. his address, his real name) on the 'victim'. 10 to 1 he gave it to them himself.
86
posted on
01/12/2006 10:28:21 AM PST
by
MEGoody
(Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
To: buffyt
I just read that one! What a hoot! I guess we can ALL sue each other HERE on FR from time to time~ I have certainly been flamed! LOLAs for me, I have never said anything online that I later regret having said. And if you believe that . . .
To: right-wingin_It
Couldn't the President have used his line item veto on these midnight additions to congresional bills?When did the President get the power for line item veto? I must have missed something.
88
posted on
01/12/2006 10:29:56 AM PST
by
MEGoody
(Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
To: Jersey Republican Biker Chick
The plain fact is, it's rather hard for someone in a chat room to 'threaten' you or 'harrass' you if you aren't sharing personal info with them. If you don't like what they say, you can click 'ignore' so you don't see their posts, and you can shut them out so they can't send mail or IMs.
In other words, don't share personal info with random people in chat rooms.
89
posted on
01/12/2006 10:32:26 AM PST
by
MEGoody
(Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
To: BJClinton
Probably -- but it would be really hard to pass off Ann-Margret as a guy...
90
posted on
01/12/2006 10:32:51 AM PST
by
mikrofon
(You half-males)
To: Termite_Commander
omg u cnt b seris cud u rly su us??/???
I don't know which is most worrisome: the lawsuit or the fact that I understand what you wrote(?). ;)
91
posted on
01/12/2006 10:34:54 AM PST
by
Fawnn
(Canteen wOOhOO Consultant and CookingWithPam.com person - Faith makes things possible, not easy.)
To: MEGoody
I am only speaking on things I have seen done to others.
I am waiting to see what type of law suits arise from these new laws. It will be very interesting.
To: MEGoody
10 to 1 he gave it to them himself.
He was probably trying to hook-up with them and gave them some contact info.
93
posted on
01/12/2006 10:45:51 AM PST
by
BJClinton
(Dogs: because you can't beat your kids.)
To: MEGoody
I recalled it passed with Clinton in office when I was in college...
But I just looked it up right now, and see the SCOTUS struck it down in '98. That explains it!
To: Owl_Eagle
Possibly.
If my head had been hard enough to break the bottle, the liquor would have been spilled and you would have not been able to consume it. If you hadn't been able to consume it then you almost certainly would not have been (as) intoxicated, and you probably would have been able to maintain your balance when the fire hydrant stepped in front of you. Therefore, my fault.
If I were you, I would sue both me and the owner of the errant hydrant.
95
posted on
01/12/2006 10:55:25 AM PST
by
WayneS
(Honor the 2nd Amendment; repeal the 16th.)
To: Owl_Eagle
Oh, and by the way, please return the stuffed panda.
96
posted on
01/12/2006 10:57:17 AM PST
by
WayneS
(Honor the 2nd Amendment; repeal the 16th.)
To: BJClinton
His first mistake was becoming an AOL subscriber. It was all downhill after that.
97
posted on
01/12/2006 11:00:11 AM PST
by
GraniteStateConservative
(...He had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here...-- Worst.President.Ever.)
To: Tax-chick
If that's true, there could be a cause of action. Yeah, that shows malice aforethought, that's for sure. But the claimant publicly posted his private information, which may exclude him from the "private person" considerations.
Of course, anything discovered from the courthouse is public record anyway, and truth is a pretty good defense against libel.
Interesting case. That's why I stay out of chatrooms, too many losers and psychos hang out there.
98
posted on
01/12/2006 11:22:27 AM PST
by
Kenton
To: cripplecreek
"...a face that could scare a hungry wolf off a meat truck."
I don't care where you're from, that is funny. I'll be using that line at some point in the future.
99
posted on
01/12/2006 11:34:26 AM PST
by
mad puppy
( The Southern border needs to be a MAJOR issue in 2006 and 2008)
To: mad puppy
My favorite was....
"Maximum seating capacity 80 people....or you"
100
posted on
01/12/2006 11:39:57 AM PST
by
cripplecreek
(Never a minigun handy when you need one.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-118 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson