Off Topix: Hawkins clerk of courts su...

Off Topix: Hawkins clerk of courts sues anonymous blogger

There are 118 comments on the Kingsport Times story from Jan 9, 2013, titled Off Topix: Hawkins clerk of courts sues anonymous blogger. In it, Kingsport Times reports that:

One Hawkins County official who was a victim of malicious false allegations of infidelity on a popular Rogersville online forum last year wants cyber bullies to know there is no such thing as total anonymity on the Internet.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Kingsport Times.

First Prev
of 6
Next Last
way to go

Charlotte, NC

#1 Jan 9, 2013
Kudos for taking a stand!

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Southern Lady

Lebanon, TN

#2 Jan 9, 2013
Good for her... I hope she pursues it until they find out who did... Someone has guts to stand up for morals and integrity in this Town and we should support her... Maybe it will be a start for everyone to stand up against gossipers and those who drag everyone down ...and put the focus on making this a Town we can be proud of and support people with problems instead of create them...

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#3 Jan 10, 2013
Good job. This could get interesting.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#4 Jan 10, 2013
A couple - from Texas I think - won a big suit against a group of people who were doing something similar. The court forced Topix to give up their names and addresses and they were hauled into court.
Maybe

Sevierville, TN

#5 Jan 10, 2013
it is about time someone try to clean up this garbage dump!
A Nonny Mouse

Johnson City, TN

#6 Jan 10, 2013
Two aspects of the case appear a bit sensationalistic.

I totally don't believe the lawyers claim that his posts were auto-deleted one minute after posting. Sounds like a typical lawyer tactic to infer that he and his client are "being picked on" once again, this time by the owner of a big bad website.

The other thing I don't believe is the assertion on her part that comments posted on here can be marriage-ending, and how lucky she is that her husband was "understanding". I don't know about you, but if comments were posted on this site about me having sex, my spouse would just get a good laugh, not sue for divorce. As would the majority of others.

As a public official, she has a higher burden of proof for libel. She has to prove specific intent to do damage rather than simply go after someone who brain-farted a slanderous comment all over their keyboard.

Sounds to me she isn't trying to win, but rather uncloak the poster for her personal knowledge and send a "chill" through the forum here. And there is plenty wrong with any public figure who thinks its their job to intimidate the public into biting their tongue.
70sMan

Johnson City, TN

#7 Jan 10, 2013
RIGHT! Only the poor john and jane doe does'nt matter, only the elite does.

Sounds like the creating of a world government ruled by an elite group of people whose main objective is to control.
Wendy

Sevierville, TN

#8 Jan 10, 2013
A Nonny Mouse wrote:
Two aspects of the case appear a bit sensationalistic.
I totally don't believe the lawyers claim that his posts were auto-deleted one minute after posting. Sounds like a typical lawyer tactic to infer that he and his client are "being picked on" once again, this time by the owner of a big bad website.
The other thing I don't believe is the assertion on her part that comments posted on here can be marriage-ending, and how lucky she is that her husband was "understanding". I don't know about you, but if comments were posted on this site about me having sex, my spouse would just get a good laugh, not sue for divorce. As would the majority of others.
As a public official, she has a higher burden of proof for libel. She has to prove specific intent to do damage rather than simply go after someone who brain-farted a slanderous comment all over their keyboard.
Sounds to me she isn't trying to win, but rather uncloak the poster for her personal knowledge and send a "chill" through the forum here. And there is plenty wrong with any public figure who thinks its their job to intimidate the public into biting their tongue.
BRILLIANT , TOTALLY AGREE.!
duh

Jefferson City, TN

#9 Jan 10, 2013
I pulled the 2 remaining threads up and read through them. I know the original thread was deleted so I can't review it. However, I am not sure they have a reason to go after that particular poster. The particular poster refers to what was posted on the other thread, the deleted one. Others on the remaining threads say more vicious things than what the targeted poster says.

Just thought it odd they would target that one poster. I do admit there may have been more posted on the original thread that could have been more damning.

Wonder but can't remember if original thread names her specifically and precisely? Common sounding name that seems that she would have to have been specifically addressed but I am no legal scholar.
hmmm

Charlotte, NC

#10 Jan 10, 2013
From what I've read about successful lawsuits against topix posters, the Plantiff has to prove that the comments DID, not could have, caused loss of a job, etc. Also, topix has disclaimers in place to avoid lawsuits.
willy

United States

#11 Jan 10, 2013
A Nonny Mouse wrote:
Two aspects of the case appear a bit sensationalistic.
I totally don't believe the lawyers claim that his posts were auto-deleted one minute after posting. Sounds like a typical lawyer tactic to infer that he and his client are "being picked on" once again, this time by the owner of a big bad website.
The other thing I don't believe is the assertion on her part that comments posted on here can be marriage-ending, and how lucky she is that her husband was "understanding". I don't know about you, but if comments were posted on this site about me having sex, my spouse would just get a good laugh, not sue for divorce. As would the majority of others.
As a public official, she has a higher burden of proof for libel. She has to prove specific intent to do damage rather than simply go after someone who brain-farted a slanderous comment all over their keyboard.
Sounds to me she isn't trying to win, but rather uncloak the poster for her personal knowledge and send a "chill" through the forum here. And there is plenty wrong with any public figure who thinks its their job to intimidate the public into biting their tongue.
I agree. However, people should not use this forum to make such allegations if these allegations are false.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#12 Jan 10, 2013
hmmm wrote:
From what I've read about successful lawsuits against topix posters, the Plantiff has to prove that the comments DID, not could have, caused loss of a job, etc. Also, topix has disclaimers in place to avoid lawsuits.
The disclaimer protects Topix from a lawsuit...not the person who makes or repeats the post. That's covered by libel law.
Internet libel consists of statements published on Web sites that were known to be false by the writer or that can be shown to have caused harm to the party at which they were directed. The law doesn't define a degree or harm, so if damage to a community standing or job status is at issue the degree of harm can be a matter or whose argument is best. The thing that bites is if you are sued and even it you win you have to pay for the lawyer etc. and that can cost thousands of dollars.
duh

Jefferson City, TN

#13 Jan 10, 2013
Would that not target the poster who admitted she/he made the whole scenario up?
They admit to it on one of the remaining threads.
A Nonny Mouse

Johnson City, TN

#14 Jan 10, 2013
willy wrote:
I agree. However, people should not use this forum to make such allegations if these allegations are false.
Forty years ago, stupid people would put their life in danger clinging to a bridge girder in order to spray-paint on a bridge that "Tommy luvs Susan 4ever" or "John is a fag".

Today, that bridge and paint can has been replaced by a website, and that website comes with no threat of falling to your death or serious physical injury.

Yea, it shouldn't be done, but good luck on stopping all that.

Mrs. Davis is a rookie public official who needs a thicker skin. If one wants to live in the political kitchen, expect the heat.
hmmm

Charlotte, NC

#15 Jan 10, 2013
True. A couple of years ago, a teacher in my county was slandered on topix. The teacher hired a lawyer and attempted to get the poster's identity. Thousands of dollars from the teaqcher's pocket later and NO name was given. Lawyers are the only ones who make money on this type of thing.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#16 Jan 10, 2013
A Texas couple who filed a defamation lawsuit over three years ago against anonymous posters on the Internet forum Topix.com won a $13.8 million judgment from a jury.

Mark and Rhonda Lesher of Clarksville, Texas, filed a suit against anonymous commenters who accused them of being sexual deviants, molesters, and drug dealers on Topix, once self-described as "the country's largest local forum site." Hre's the full story.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/jury-awards-13...
Maybe

Sevierville, TN

#17 Jan 10, 2013
A Nonny Mouse wrote:
<quoted text>
Forty years ago, stupid people would put their life in danger clinging to a bridge girder in order to spray-paint on a bridge that "Tommy luvs Susan 4ever" or "John is a fag".
Today, that bridge and paint can has been replaced by a website, and that website comes with no threat of falling to your death or serious physical injury.
Yea, it shouldn't be done, but good luck on stopping all that.
Mrs. Davis is a rookie public official who needs a thicker skin. If one wants to live in the political kitchen, expect the heat.
Here's hoping your name is smeared through the mud, pal.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#18 Jan 10, 2013
A Nonny Mouse wrote:
<quoted text>
Forty years ago, stupid people would put their life in danger clinging to a bridge girder in order to spray-paint on a bridge that "Tommy luvs Susan 4ever" or "John is a fag".
Today, that bridge and paint can has been replaced by a website, and that website comes with no threat of falling to your death or serious physical injury.
Yea, it shouldn't be done, but good luck on stopping all that.
Mrs. Davis is a rookie public official who needs a thicker skin. If one wants to live in the political kitchen, expect the heat.
When, as it will, progresses to a point where the suits are filed more often and plp lose their homes and have their wages garnished plp will pay more attention. You right to free speech is protected, but it's not unlimited or comes without consequences if you step over the line. There are some limited absolute privileges. And statements made in good faith with a reasonable belief that they are true are usually treated the same as true statements.
Statements made in a good faith and reasonable belief that they were true are generally treated the same as true statements. Where plp get in trouble is with baseless or malicious gossip.
Yo Mama Obama

Charlotte, NC

#19 Jan 10, 2013
Some people think that elected officials can be commented about because of our first amendment rights. However, As soon as I finish destroying second amendment rights through the use of executive orders (edicts from the monarch) I shall start chipping away at free speech and the free press(cyber press?)

Praise Allah (free us from freedom)
Derr

Elizabethton, TN

#20 Jan 10, 2013
duh wrote:
Would that not target the poster who admitted she/he made the whole scenario up?
They admit to it on one of the remaining threads.
Maybe because the original poster said they made up a topic with absolutely no names and no hints other than prominent, old money and a location. Then the local gossips made up their own stories and are now going to get in trouble for it. In fact, the original individual stated over and over that they totally made it up and you people still refused to believe them. Calling the original poster guilty is like making Billy Bob guilty for saying, "Did you hear about what happened up in Stanley Valley last week" and then a week later a man shoots his neighbors dog because of it.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Rogersville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Grand son taking Mamaw for ride 1 hr Von Dooskie 7
Gary Simpson 2 hr A citizen 4
More on Megan Moore 7 hr Tillamook Queso 4
Stephanie Harmon 8 hr 8itkh 11
Walmart Bathroom 11 hr Laya 6
Markita head dope who're screws cousins and wom... 13 hr Wow 4
Carrier took Trump, Aerica for a ride 14 hr Melt the Snowflakes 14

Rogersville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Rogersville Mortgages