The only unique feature of Wild Bill's post about Jordan Edmund (at Passionate America) is that it begins with the instant messages, in image form provided by ABC, and methodically works backward to connect all the various dots that lead back to Jordan Edmund, very convincingly. I suspect that Stephen Jones intends to...unconnect...some of those dots. I don't see how. I think this smells of fear that Mr. Edmund may be facing some criminal charges as well.

I sent this to Mr. Kerr; feel free to publish it:

I read the email from the attorney.

His client is now what is known under the law as a "semi-public" personality, if in fact not a "public personality," given the scope of the story, the breadth of its dissemination, and the fact that his client is employed as a political operative in an active campaign for the governorship.

Unless the subject's attorney can demonstrate that you published "with a reckless disregard for the truth" in a "malicious manner," he can go pound sand. If the IM scammer thinks this is the best legal representation he can get, he's cooked.

I thought the most foolish part of his email had to do with premising you must have someone's "authorization" to run his client's name or photograph. The guy is a campaign staffer, and this is legitimate news affecting the campaign with which he is associated.

He appears publicly in connection with the campaign as a matter of his employment; does this attorney think news organizations around the world have to either get his client's permission to have his image in a photo, or else brush stroke the guy out if they don't? What a maroon.

Well, I guess you have to give the attorney 2 points for trying to bluff you into submission. While he is suggesting you seek an attorney familiar with civil and criminal liability, he may want to contact an attorney himself to stop having a "fool for a client" when considering exactly what you will be able to subpoena and depose if a civil suit is filed - multiplied infinitely if a criminal investigation began. There are no Fifth Amendment claims in a civil suit. Ask OJ Simpson.

To sum up what I would tell the attorney threatening me with civil and criminal liability: "Oh Br'er Fox - please don't throw me into that briar patch . . ."

All the remarks I've made are my personal opinion, and in no way should be constructed to reflect the opinion of the publications for which I write. Feel free to publish this if it will get the attorney to stop making a national fool of himself.

Kenneth E. Lamb

Program Host for
"CyberSmart! Saturday" ™
"Your Turn"
"Link to Life" ™ hurricane expert

Blogs authored by Kenneth E. Lamb / blogger profile listed at:
http://www.blogger.com/profile/14444338

email: mailto:kenneth@kennethelamb.com
web: http://www.kennethelamb.com
bio: http://www.kennethelamb.com/bio.htm

Coincidentally, Justin and I will be together tonight. My wife, mom, he, and I are all going to the Magic Castle.

Patterico:

My wife, mom, he, and I are all going to the Magic Castle.

Patterica is a sock puppet, too. You put on a very convincing show, Mr. Patterico; but I could tell that the "Patterica" you brought to Lowenbrau Keller was an android: your mistake was in making her too perfect; no actual human being has such etherial beauty and ageless grace.

Bah, it's a classic error of all evil overlords.

Bring me back a hat with a rabbit inside. I'd love to try to make hasenpfeffer again...

Dafydd

Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)

(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)

URL:
Remember me unto the end of days? AyeNay!

Comments: (Sssselect text and bite a button to apply HTML tagssssss...)