Part II.

In writing these articles we hope to alleviate fears, encourage individuals to stop posting harassing threats of imminent lawsuits and educate ourselves and others as to exactly what constitutional protections are afforded to each of us. We also hope that these articles stimulate debate on the topic of internet postings, the right of free speech and the limits imposed by the current case law.

Freedom of speech is at the heart of America’s unique sense of liberty and democratic values. Justice Louis Brandeis wrote in Whitney v. California (1927), that

“freedom to think as you will and to speak as you think are means indispensable to the discovery and spread of political truth… order cannot be secured merely through fear of punishment for its infraction; that it is hazardous to discourage thought, hope and imagination; that fear breeds repression; that repression breeds hate; that hate menaces stable government; that the path of safety lies in the opportunity to discuss freely supposed grievances and proposed remedies; and that the fitting remedy for evil counsels is good ones… the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Share This

Those of us who have been following the investigations and subsequent lawsuits surrounding the deaths of Anna Nicole Smith and her son Daniel Wayne Smith have at one time or another been threatened with exposure to lawsuits, physical violence and other sundry unmentionable acts. At times, I have felt embarrassed, humiliated, angered, outraged, amused and frustrated. But lately the dominant emotion has been disbelief. Disbelief, that human beings can behave in a manner that I never imagined before joining the list of interested citizens reading and voicing my opinion on the subject.

Many have expressed their frustration over the perception that their fundamental right to free speech has been threatened and at times thwarted by persons involved in this whole mess of a media and legal circus. Most of these rants have no basis in fact or law and the problem is easily remedied by simply clicking on the “red x” in the corner and retiring with a good book. But not all the concerns expressed can be so casually dismissed. As tawdry and at times silly as some of this is, there are profound legal and moral issues involved.

( Need not be registered to comment but see rules below. Thank you.) Read the rest of this entry »

Share This

As I wrote a few days ago, there are many facets and people from all walks of life involved in the story of the deaths of Anna Nicole Smith and her son Daniel Wayne Smith. One sector is the infinite world of the internet and its bloggers.

Howard K. Stern's attorney Lin Wood wrote a piece entitled "Litigating in the Court of Public Opinion". 

I personally have not read any of his work but the title is intriguing in that some of the folks in the internet part of this story are what I consider warriors for the truth. Their truth. These warriors come from all over the world.

Those of like minds who have gathered together to discuss this case are very passionate about it. They are shaping public opinion. Some realize it and work hard at it. Some just like the discussion and arguing. However they indeed are making a difference concerning what the public thinks about the premature deaths of Anna Nicole and Daniel. And they do matter and will be heard in the various lawsuits. Maybe not right out front but they are there. And so am I.

I suppose that is why Mr. Lin Wood checks in on my site most every day. He knows from experience that we are a part of these cases. I’m kind of busy in the summer time so I don’t have too much to say. Things will be more active as we move into fall Mr. Wood, so keep checking back.

Without further commentary from me, I would like to present another article written by the blogger known as Einy. Her group experienced first hand how involved and even scary this case has become for some of us that are said to be unimportant. And as these civil lawsuit cases move on, I fear more of the same of what Einy is writing about.

Click on over to The Red Couch to read “Trick or Treat, Why Go to a Costume Party Without a Costume?” Written by Einy..

Share This

In the United States District Court, Southern District of Texas today, the honorable Judge Lee H. Rosenthal filed a thirty-one page order dispensing with several motions before her, in the civil suit of Anna Nicole Smith’s mother, Virgie Arthur vs Howard K. Stern and CBS Studios and KPRC Houston.

The attorneys for Mrs. Arthur had sought to add additional defendants to the lawsuit after her attorneys had discovered that there was defamation ongoing not only on television but also on the internet.

Attorney Neil McCabe of the O’Quinn Law Firm in Houston TX filed a motion to add Art Harris, a journalist and blog owner of artharris.com, Bonnie Stern, sister of Howard K. Stern, Harvey Levin, managing editor of TMZ.com and also TMZ the internet site and company. Also requested to be added were bloggers Nelda Rose Turner, owner of rosepeaks.com, Lyndal Harrington, a moderator of rosespeaks.com and Teresa Stephens a former moderator of rosespeaks.com.

The motion to add the additional defendants was denied. However, anticipating a denial, McCabe and colleague Attorney Michael Meyer filed a lawsuit in the 190th District Court of Harris County Texas against the additional defendants. There are presently jurisdiction objections from the non Texas residents. Also there are motions pending in that court and requests for documents and examination of computers used to allegedly defame Mrs. Arthur.

Judge Rosenthal lists the various reasons for denial however, she recognized the validity of the claim of defamation and conspiracy and went as far as to write in her opinion that the added claim appears cognizable to pursue in state court. Cognizable The power, authority, and ability of a judge to determine a particular legal matter. (click on the highlighted words for more in depth definitions). The state court claim was also filed in a timely manner and can now commence.
Read the rest of this entry »

Share This

Today, a compelling argument was presented by Virgie Arthur attorney Neil McCabe of the O’Quinn Law Firm. This concerns the late Anna Nicole Smith mother’s lawsuit against bloggers Rose and Ken Turner in conjunction with her defamation action against Howard K Stern and CBS Studios. Other defendants requested to be added to the suit include journalist Art Harris, Harvey Levin and TMZ.com, Bonnie Stern, Howard’s sister and two moderators from the Turners website, Lyndal Harrington and Teresa Stephens.

The Turners, seeking to transfer venue in a manuver to sidestep a subpoena requesting their computer records, cite First Amendment objections. At the same time, McCabe outlines how Mrs Turner on her website “objects to the subpoena in religious terms relating to her domestic practices”. For those not aware, Mr and Mrs Turner practice the BDSM lifestyle and apparently have attempted to claim the lifestyle as a religion in statements made on their internet site.

An interesting notation is how Turner’s commentary sparked internet discussion prompting the creation of an article published on The Red Couch by bloggers known as Kerry and Einy. The article title pretty much says it all.

Read; Why Being Made To Sit In The Corner Is Not Foreplay Or Worship,The Anna Nicole Smith Saga Through Rose-Colored Glasses.

The Sur-Reply filed in the United States District Court of Eastern Texas. 060408_Arthur_Sur-Reply_Turner was provided by one of our members. Thank you.

Share This

Review the latest legal documents and see what you think?

Share This

A history making document concerning the Anna Nicole Smith story was filed today in the defamation lawsuit, Virgie Arthur vs Howard K. Stern, CBS Studios, INC. and KPRC Houston.

Arthur’s attorneys today requested to add additional defendants to the suit. Those persons/entities are as listed in the filing, Bonnie Stern, the sister of Howard K. Stern, TMZ Productions, Inc. and its managing editor Harvey Levin, Nelda Turner the owner of the website RoseSpeaks and Art Harris an Atlanta, Georgia based professional journalist. Arthur’s attorney Neil McCabe of the O’ Quinn Law Firm is asking the court to add the additional parties by March 28, 2008. Read the rest of this entry »

Share This

Things have finally settled down at least for awhile in the Anna Nicole Smith chronicle. The message boards that are active more or less seem to be rehashing the same old news and the same old arguments. Save for a stray bit of drama or attempts to sensationalize trivial matters.

The announcement from Howardsville that IP numbers were being collected and bloggers who slander Howard K Stern will be held accountable, seemed to make people wonder just who is watching what hen house. It was the beginning of a cooling off period that is now seen internet wide. A professional journalist abruptly stopped his coverage of this story and many familiar nick names are not heard from anymore.

Then the first subpoena for an internet blogger was served and revealed, although not exactly in that order. It seemed to send even more of a hush though out our communities. The bloggers themselves that are so aptly called the “Sterniods” and the “Antinoids” on the large celeb gossip site TMZ have shrunk in numbers as well. By the way, whomever invented those monikers was spot on. My observation in this story is that either you are for Howard K. or against him. I can see three trains of thought most prevalent out there. Pro-Virgie, pro Howard or anti-Howard.

So, what was to come reaching into the depths of the Anna Nicole internet neighborhood, was quite poetic. It was “who” in particular, ended up with the subpoenas after IP threats and the creation of the “wall of shame”. After the publication of the story of this website and what was going on behind the scenes it should be no surprise.

Anyone that was worried and thought that their first amendment rights were in danger by the likes of Neil McCabe or L. Lin Wood can relax. Blog on. What lawyers are looking for are not bloggers but people that have taken their involvement in this case to the depths of inviting actionable consequences. There are just a small handful, but they exist.

The lack of activity has been nice for me. I got mine and some family member’s income taxes filed and a couple of projects done around the house. My point is, if you are tired of the story, by all means step back. I have to an extent. Just be sure to check in every once in awhile so we don’t lose touch. And it goes without saying that we will gather for activities and happenings worthy of comment. But if you have fear that you are going to attract a subpoena for simply expressing your opinion, it’s not going to happen.

*New legal documents posted.
Filed 02/21/2008

Virgie Arthur v Howard K Stern, CBS Studios and KPRC Houston

Order granting Arthur’s unopposed motion to amend response to Stern’s rule 12(b)(2) motion to dismiss.

Order_granting_amended_response_02212008.pdf

Filed 02/14/2008

Stern v. Cosby et al

Stern-v-Cosby-protection-order-02142008.pdf

Share This