Posted on 09/27/2009 12:49:27 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
Here is the full text of the ACORN complaint against James O'Keefe, Hannah Giles, and Breitbart.com. ACORN is suing for over $3,000,000 plus litigation costs and requesting appropriate punative damages. They demand a jury trial. The complaint asks the court to enter a temporary restraining order, preliminary and permament injunctions requiring the defendants to cease distributing and broadcasting the oral communications intercepted in the Baltimore offices of ACORN in July 2009, and to make their best efforts to prevent others from distributing and broadcasting said communications.
Hannah Giles has launched a legal defense fund. You can donate here.
The racism used by the Left knows no bounds, and results in MANY racist verdicts that vindicate "that poor black" man or group......
Why not file a counter complaint in Federal court arguing that Maryland Courts and Judicial Proceedings Code subsections 10-402(a)(1)(2) and (3)violates the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States?
Have a Federal judge STRIKE DOWN that section of the Maryland code as being UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Secondly, have Giles, Hannah and Briebart submit the tapes along with an affadavit complaining of ACORN CRIMINAL activity with their belief that multiple FELONIES have been committed.
After all, its the duty of all citizens to report crimes to the proper authorities. To NOT report criminal activity is a CRIME.
Just another bunch of CIVIL attorneys who are going to get their buts kicked BIG TIME in Federal Criminal Court.
Meddlesome amateurs.
Jury selection should be pretty easy. “Do you now or have you ever had any kind of relationship with ACORN, including, but not limited to, being a member, volunteer, demonstrator, supporter or recipient of aid or advice?”
There goes half the city.
Very interesting. I just read the complaint, and they are NOT challenging the truth of the tapes.
I think you’re right. Discovery has to pertain to the case, and it would be a stretch to dig very far on the interception issue.
BUT, don’t forget that there is such a thing as a counter-complaint. ACORN has said the videos were not truthful, so O’Keefe as a filmmaker can file a counter-complaint over the truthfulness and have pretty wide access to ACORN’s internal policies and procedures.
I can see the jury questioning now—
Have you ever heard of acorn?
Have you ever volunteered, worked for acorn?
Do you have relatives who are currently working or in the past worked for acorn?
Ever donated to acorn?
Ever been a client?
Background checks on ALL jurors.
Surely they aren’t accusing the ‘defendants’ of planting bugs in the offices? (/sar)
O'Keefe's and Giles' only offense is to put ACORN on trial in the court of public opinion. They've done that and the public outrage has forced government authorities to investigate ACORN, which will probably lead to criminal prosecution.
Since O'Keefe and Giles are the defendants in this case, they don't have to prove their innocence. ACORN has the burden to prove that their Baltimore employees had a legal right to private communication with O'Keefe and Giles and that by publicly disclosing the details of the allegedly private conversations, O'Keefe and Giles broke the law. It is not clear that the ACORN employees had such a right. (At least, that's my understanding of OldDeckHand's summary in post #36 of why the tapes may not be illegal.)
Of course they will win with a jury of “peers” bringing the verdict in, BUT these fools will be a penny wise and a pound foolish because of the “D” word. shhhh don’t say it these stupid asses don’t understand what that means.
See my post #48 for a response to your comment.
Hello Newbie.....why don’t you write to them and give them your advice....it would be way more helpful than calling them amateurs.
Interesting idea. I hadn't thought of that as a possibility for a civil suit against ACORN. Libel AND slander of O'Keefe and Giles by Bertha Lewis, CEO of ACORN?
libel (noun): a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression
slander (noun): a false and defamatory oral statement about a person
Maybe it’s somewhere else in this thread, but if ACORN fired these two people for improperly representing ACORN, how can ACORN now join with them as plaintiffs? Wouldn’t any attorney representing them automatically have a conflict of interest in coordinating any action w/ACORN?
Not if the firings were a sham.
I don't practice civil or employment law, but it's a very, very strange set of circumstances. On it's face, it certainly appears that there could be a conflict of interest. After all, if what they allege in their complaint is true, ACORN fired these employees because they fell victim to crime, which is hardly a position of strength if defending yourself from some kind of employment-based civil suit.
I'm not familiar with the employment laws in MD - perhaps they (the employees) have some course of action against ACORN, perhaps they don't. But, this particular civil suit seems to muddy already murky waters between those two parties - employer & employee.
bump
THE KIDS’ project certainly helped out the rest of us. Look at Indiana’s results:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2349463/posts?page=227#227
The defendants haven’t been served. I wonder if they ever will be. It seems very odd to post the suit before it’s been served. This may just be a publicity-type stunt to get their BS side of the argument in front of the public without having to endure discovery and cross-examinations.
Sounds like our side will need lots and lots of witnesses in that courthouse.
Jury trial.
I’ll bet ACORN buys off the jurors on this one too.
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.