Hypocrite lawyer
Jeremy Sear and Dave Gaukroger, the Gilmore Girls of the internet, enjoy a high-pitched conversation. One topic is defamation, and how bad it is when people who Jeremy doesn’t
like take legal action.
But Jeremy doesn’t mention how often he himself takes – or threatens to take – legal action. By my count at least three different bloggers have at one time or another received a legal threat from Sear, who rarely backs up his threats with any actual writs.
As the Gilmore Girls say, it has a "chilling effect" on free speech.
like take legal action.
But Jeremy doesn’t mention how often he himself takes – or threatens to take – legal action. By my count at least three different bloggers have at one time or another received a legal threat from Sear, who rarely backs up his threats with any actual writs.
As the Gilmore Girls say, it has a "chilling effect" on free speech.
posted by Anonymous at 11:11 AM |
20 Comments:
That audio is unreal. If Jeremy gets that worked up when he’s talking to someone he agrees with, imagine what he sounds like in an argument. Only dogs would hear him.
Buty I think the number of bloggers he’s threatened is more than three. There’s you, Iain Hall, Leon Bertrand, vexnews, and Tim Blair at least. And probably multiple times each.
Good catch, JF.
Hope I'm not next in line... Know any good lawyers? ;-P
http://twitter.com/s_dog/status/10976069213487104
So, if your response was:
Mickey Mouse
Disneyland
1313 South Harbor Boulevard,
Anaheim, CA
United States
... would he (Jerry Sear) be cognizant of any difference?
Cheers
What's amusing is that Jeremy's source for the 'many harassing and defamatory' posts is just your webpage. No single link, no specific source.
I guess with so 'many' to choose from, it must've been hard for Jeremy to decide. Far easier to just blame the whole site.
Out of curiousity JF - what happened next? Did you supply your address? If so, did he actually follow through?
"What's amusing is that Jeremy's source for the 'many harassing and defamatory' posts is just your webpage. No single link, no specific source." .
Yeah, well. It was just ... the vibe of the thing.
Top barristers know this chit.
After providing my details I heard nothing more from Jeremy. Funny that.
I have always wondered about the propriety of Jeremy using his vicbar email account to attempt to intimidate.
I would be troubled by giving Jeremy Sear my real name. Jeremy seems to have a following of frauds and liars.
I'm another who's been offered legal punishment by Jeremy.
In my case he was pissed off because I linked to a public web site HE himself posted at.
Go figure.
The irony is that Sear himself has defamed many other people on the Internet. But not using his real name. He does it under aliases - a whole host of them - at various hate blogs he runs.
We sit behind a corporate firewall that blocks sites based on a ratings system based ona datebase the device subscribes to. Interestingly, the link you have for the Gilmore girls is blocked due to ADULT/MATURE CONTENT.
But smutty Scott's not even there?
Has anyone heard from Sear's old stalking partner "Bridgit Gread" lately? She's gone awfully quiet since someone found out her real identity*. She's even protected her vile Twitter account.
*Hint: she works @ The Age
Where was her identity revealed?
Privately, I believe. To her. It hasn't been made public ... yet. She's been at The Age for 20 years. You'd reckon someone in her position would refrain from stalking on the net anonymously, wouldn't you? Just shows how spiteful, hateful and plain stupid she is.
I guess I will believe it when I see it.
"Bridgit Gread" aka _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ is an Age journo. She denies her secret identity but the evidence that she is that person is overwhelming & very convincing. I don't know if she'll be publicly named, or where and how, but if I were her I'd be deleting the Twitter account and the hate blogs she's involved in. She also needs to issue a few apologies to certain people.
The Age employs journos?
Stalky weirdos bug me as much as they do the next person. Which is why I'm wondering what point all these "Anonymouses" think they're making by stalking someone for being stalky.
Kinda hard to look down on someone when you're sitting there in the gutter next to them.
"Y'know what I'm sayin'?"
spot.
The comments here about "Bridgit Gread" - whose identity has not been revealed - do not constitute "stalking", Spot.
Stalking is what she does, by posting malicious crap about real identities. And harassing them.
And whether that's said under a real name or anonymously it is NOT stalking her - because it cannot do her any harm.
If what you're "sayin" is right then anonymous whistleblowers are as bad as the real crims they point the finger at. And that's just crap. Maybe you should check out the laws about "stalking" before you start pointing the finger at others.
Otherwise you're just apologising for scumbags like Gread on the basis of "what you're doing is the same". It isn't.
"Bridgit Gread" already has an internet footprint infinitely greater than her importance. If someone has something to say let them say it. Otherwise I propose the issue closed.
The Bridgit Gread comments are irrelevant. No one with any sense cares who she is.
Post a Comment
<< Home