Posted on 10/06/2006 2:06:53 PM PDT by jrooney
BTW, that happened BEFORE the letter got published. Editor lost his job over that one.
The issues is whether John Edmond is a private or a public individual.
If he is public the rules are a great deal harder.
The real issue is one of truth. Is everything truthful?
Did John Edmund really do the things he did?
What is the lawyer demanding?
You can print the actual demand letter of the lawyer.
lol! Love it. You opposed Barbara Jordan!? You are the man. :) I'd sure enjoy reading what you fired off to the "prankster". lol
Demand letters unless specifice otherwise by law can be merely mailed.
Though you generally send a demand required as a predicate to a law suit via certified mail just to cover yourself for later proof.
I say print the demand of the lawyer publicly.
Good point. Wild Bill doesn't needs "clingons" attached to his email acct.
Excellent follow-up, muawiyah. I once had two guys pretending to be the FBI at my door. Told them to wait; made a phone call, and when I came back they were gone.
He had a previous suit AGAINST the Repubs I believe in a campaign ad published in a magazine. IIRC, it was in regard to two homosexuals who had gotten married. I believe the ad published a picture of them from the ceremony.
he has posted the lawyers letter.
The lawyers letter is fluff. He does not deny the IMs are from Edmunds in fact he points out Ross has been correct in the past.
The report is that of ABC screwing up and posting all the wrong data.
Jones is disembling. Put this in front of a judge and the FIRST question the judge will want to know is if Edmunds is the person in question. THEN we start to have discovery.
Does Edmunds (or the people paying for his lawyer) REALLY want deep probing discovery? Will Ross divulge the truth?
Perhaps the house ethics committee wants to know who is paying for Edmunds Lawyer, perhaps a few subpoenas from the house will clarify the minds.
Dear William Kerr and Passionate America:
Please be advised that I represent Jordan Edmund. It is our understanding that you and Passionate American are identifying Mr. Edmund with certain Instant Messages ("IMs"). You have indicated that ABC News mistakenly published these alleged Ims and that you should not have been able to obtain this information. Whether this is true or not is beside the point. Without any foundation or legal permission, you are stating that our client is the person associated with the Ims. Neither ABC News nor Brian Ross have been error free in their reporting in the past. You should not assume that they are correct now. Like all individuals and institutions, they occasionally make mistakes. Therefore, I respectfully demand that you cease any further efforts to identify our client with these alleged Ims and cease publishing such information on Passionate America. Neither you nor Passionate American is authorized to use any photograph of him, his name or his personal information. You should consult with an attorney who is experienced in civil and criminal liability regarding the internet. If you are correct that ABC News should not have released the alleged AOL screen name and that ABC News has risked civil and criminal liability because of the unauthorized release, then your republication of the unauthorized release likewise exposes you to possible liability.
Sincerely,
Stephen Jones
JONES, OTJEN, DAVIS, NIXON & JUHL
114 E. Broadway, Suite 1100
P.O. Box 472
Enid, Oklahoma 73702
(580) 242-5500
(580) 242-4556 (fax)
sjones@stephenjoneslaw.com
Far as I can recall from business years, the only "cease & desist" that has any legal force has to be issued by a Court... and my understanding from reading other information is that the matter refered to has been plastered across the web, so even if this email is authentic it appears to me to be an attempt at intimidation.
Nonetheless, PA would be wise to call a lawyer. Just to cover his bases.
These people on the left are so thuggish they actually believe they can do this stuff and not be seen.
No doubt you've already made sure the folks in the House aware of that.
I think they genuinely believe that "might makes right" while out of the other side of their mouths they utter "peace" and "love of all humanity, the Earth". Moonbatz.
That letter doesn't look like it was really written by a lawyer. It may well be a crime for someone to impersonate him, in this kind of context.
I would suggest that you contact the real Stephen Jones, looking up his contact information for yourself, and provide him with a copy, including headers. You might also want to provide a copy to the police.
I would like to read it. There are some lawyers in here who could advise him and I would bet they could read the content and tell if it is a hoax unless it is a form letter.
No, but you can claim copyright to the picture.
An attempt at intimidation.....seems to be the opinion of most here...or could be someone faking a letter from Jones....
That was my first impression, too. But, after all, Stephen Jones is the same guy who plagiarized Abraham Lincoln in writing a farewell letter to his local paper. (And yes, it was a well known Lincoln speech he plagiarized...) So maybe Jones just isn't a very good writer...
**************************************************
I just saw the lawyer for Jordan Edmund on CNN and when asked whether this was just part of a prank the lawyer said, with a small grin, “I can’t say there was not an element of a prank in this” [paraphrasing from memory]. So it seems Drudge is correct. So the barely risque emails from the SSP website were forgeries of an issue dealt with in the fall and the IMs were the results of a prank goading Foley on. No complaints in all these years from the victims. Reviews by the FBI and media concluding insufficient evidence. Parents asking Foley to not talk to their child because he was uncomfortable - and Folley complying. Nothing until faked emails hit a fake website on information CREW and ABC News had for months….
Well...they are typically sent as a first step before filing suit. Basically, to show that the plaintiff attempted to resolve the dispute outside of court first.
To be honest, one important piece of advice I have for Wild Bill is this:
Anybody can sue anybody in these United States. From the article profiling Bill in the Daily Oklahoman, he is on a pretty tight budget. Win or lose, a lawsuit will cost you money. Unless you know you can get pro bono representation, you need to consider the financial strain of a lawsuit. I know that isn't fair, but that's the way it works - nobody here would fault you for protecting your family. Besides, the information is out there now - you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube (another reason to doubt the authenticity of the letter...)
Having said that, I would first confirm that this letter came from the real Stephen Jones; if so, and if no attorneys have offered to help you, you might replace the current content with links to other sites (including Jordan Edmunds MySpace site, and all MSM articles talking about him) and leave the cease & desist letter up, as well, with a note from you to the effect that "At the request of Mr. Edmunds, via his attorney, I have removed the previous article related to former Congressman Mark Foley and former page Jordan Edmund."
Final piece of advice, as was noted earlier on this thread - don't trust legal advice you get on an anonymous chat board!
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.