SLAPP Lawsuits to Silence Dissent

[Bridget Conant]

The lawsuit against the Lakewood Observer, posted here (thanks Corey!) should worry every resident of this city. It very clearly meets the definition of what is known as a SLAPP - Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.

Here is information on what that means. Read carefully to see how this aligns with the efforts of this administration to silence critics. That the firm filing the suit is affiliated with Jay Carson, a Build Lakewood member, only reinforces the appearance that this is a calculated attempt to silence the Observer and all participants who criticize the mayor, the city, city council, and the "deal." I suspect the ultimate goal is to silence criticism and keep the Observer tied up so that the "Lakewood Neighborhood News" can suddenly reappear and sling its usual BS about what a great deal we got from the Clinic. The timing, in advance of the election, is telling.


SLAPPs are Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation. These damaging suits chill free speech and healthy debate by targeting those who communicate with their government or speak out on issues of public interest.
SLAPPs are used to silence and harass critics by forcing them to spend money to defend these baseless suits. SLAPP filers don’t go to court to seek justice. Rather, SLAPPS are intended to intimidate those who disagree with them or their activities by draining the target’s financial resources.


SLAPPs take the form of a variety of lawsuits. They commonly masquerade as defamation or business interference tort suits.


http://www.anti-slapp.org/slappdash-faqs-about-slapps/

[Bridget Conant]

From here:

http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/vie ... text=delpf

A pattern is emerging across the United States in which citizens and local community groups are being sued for what has long been considered "ordinary" public participation. Persons who write editorials, take part in referendums, or speak at town meetings are increasingly ending up in court. Although suits against such individuals rarely prevail in court, their true goals of retaliation and intimidation are frequently accomplished. Such suits, called strategic lawsuits against public participation, or SLAPPs,' use the courts to silence, harass and obstruct political opponents.

As characterized by Professor George W. Pring, a leading scholar on SLAPP suits5 the suits contain the following four criteria:
1) a civil complaint or counterclaim for monetary damages and/or an injunction;
2) filed against non-governmental individuals or groups;
3) because of their communication to a government body, official, or the
electorate;
4) on an issue of some public interest or concern."
A fifth criterion should be added to Professor Pring's list to fully characterize SLAPP suits: the suits are without merit and contain an ulterior political or economic motive

[Brian Essi]

Bridget,

Great post.

I sensed that certain posters were a bit SLAPP "happy" with their hate and distain for dissent..and the truth.

[Michael Deneen]

Bridget is on the mark!

[Michael Deneen]

The recently updated "Lakewood Citizen Spreading False Rumors" thread puts this lawsuit topic into an interesting light.

[Bridget Conant]

City Hall and their cronies are tainted - tainted with the stench of corruption.

[Lori Allen _]

The rat's behavior is certainly starting to change now that they are being backed into a corner! Usually when a liar is being fed the truth, they run out of excuses and start to attack the truth teller because they don't have facts to back up anything they say. I suspect this is the reason why Lord and Company are giving us a lot of stall tactics when it comes to records request. Something that they should be able to pull up on the computer and E-Mail in a moment now results in months of waiting! I suspect it takes a long time to possibly alter records before sending them out!

[Bridget Conant]

It's important people know about this lawsuit and hidden agenda that is behind it.

The Lakewood Observer is under attack from people who want to silence the one media source that has presented both sides of the hospital issue.

You didn't get both sides in the Plain Dealer - they are too dependent on the Clinic to dare defy them.

You obviously didn't get all the info from your secretive government, mayor or council. Cindy Marx offers to "talk privately" with a citizen who asked about the Metro offer on a Facebook page - is that how you serve your constituency?

The Lakewood Citizen is a joke. The owner is a Build Lakewood cheerleader and dare I say a city hall operative. The records show he worked to promote Summers' campaign while on city time. You think he presented both sides?

The Scene printed an article or two, favorable to the SLH side, but didn't follow the issue completely.

The ONLY media source that presented both sides of the issue was the Lakewood Observer.

The Deck also allowed the free and open exchange of opinion and information that was unavailable elsewhere.

Without these two sources, the Clinic's deep pockets and the city's unwillingness to be transparent and inclusive would have kept us all in the dark. The deal would have been signed, sealed, and delivered before anyone could protest.

The PTB in this city are angry. They want the Observer shut down. The lawsuit is far more chilling than it appears - it's about free speech and freedom of the press.

Make no mistake, it is a calculated move to CONTROL THE MESSAGE.

The election is in November. You will see the Fitzgerald phony paper reappear. If there is no Observer, we will be fed a steady diet of lies, with no one able to challenge them.

Please tell everyone you know that the Observer is being threatened. Your access to information is being threatened. Where else would you have found the information presented here?

[kate e parker]

this thread will help you even less.

[Bridget Conant]

Thank goodness you have a place where you are allowed to post your vapid comments!

[kate e parker]

the five dollar words will not help you

[Bridget Conant]

http://www.acluohio.org/slapped/what-is-a-cyber-slapp

[Corey Rossen]

http://www.acluohio.org/slapped/what-is-a-cyber-slapp

From your link:

"Large corporations and public figures are increasingly suing individuals who exercise their First Amendment rights by posting critical opinions on Internet forums such as message boards, review sites, blogs, or in chat rooms. Although the vast majority of these SLAPP suits has no legal merit and will be unsuccessful in court, it is important to be aware of potential ways to defend yourself."

Are you saying that the Lakewood Observer Project (corporation) and/or Jim O'Bryan (public figure) is suing kate e parker?

[Brian Essi]

From the article Bridget posted above: "Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act provides that users and providers of interactive computer services, including the Internet, are immune from civil liability for publishing material written by someone else.5 For example, if an online news publication published an editorial written by an anonymous blogger, the online news source could use this to shield itself from liability. Additionally, Section 230 can be used to shield bloggers who host comments on their blogs.6 Section 230 may even shield you from liability if you make professional edits to the material you publish."

Doesn't this prove that plaintiff and its attorneys suing the the LO and JOB have filed a frivolous lawsuit?

[Bridget Conant]

From the article:

However, cyberSLAPPS may also have an additional goal – to reveal the identity of the anonymous critic. Once the cyberSLAPP is filed, the plaintiff will subpoena the Website or Internet Service Provider (ISP) to reveal the identity of the anonymous critic, hoping to intimidate others from voicing their opinions in the future.1

Anyone who posts on the Buzz should be worried because their IP's will be subpoenaed.