Eric Pepin - Higher Balance Institute - Discussion

[dant]

Yahoo! (no, not the website :P )

It's great how things worked out so far! But like you say, keep vigilant and
be on guard! Evil (pathological, mechanized) people do not rest. Losers
do not give up vengeance - and will perhaps regroup and will keep trying
most likely, as we have all seen before, time and time again.

The interesting thing here - is that when evil manifest itself - objective
observers (seekers) become more mobilized to action - and we have
seen this many times... like the here and now!

Keep the light burning!
Dan

 

[SeekinTruth]

This was the best news in a long time!!! Congratulations to Laura, the SOTT team, QFG/QFS!!! What a relief that, at least for now, this is over. I'm SO glad that the judge was reasonable, full of integrity and applied the law as it was meant to be applied.

Many thanks to everyone else who helped with funds, time, energy, and all other forms of support!!!

 

[purplehaze]

Congrats Laura and SO TRUE!!

We often tell the predators who threaten us to sue or go ahead and report us to the police or the authorities. We don't consider that a threat at all. Because each and every time? The 'authorities' find out its the PREDATOR who is up to no good and the predator's actions reveal they wanted to hide something.

They are blinded by their pathology to their own actions and their repercussions. Every single time.

Funny how such types shoot themselves in the foot.

 

[Laura]

I've read Judge Haggerty's decision several times and have extracted a few general principles from it that I would like some feedback on. In particular, it seems to me that I would have a very good case suing Vinnie Bridges, Stormbear Williams, and others by the terms defined for what is or is not protected opinion in this decision. And, of course, when we get our payout from Pepin (who has to reimburse us for our legal expenses!), I'm wondering if it would be worthwhile filing suit. After all, we have attys who know us, know our situation so all we would have to do would be to hand over all the tons of files of the Vinnie Defamation and Slander project we've been collecting over the years. Since our corporation is in California, we would naturally file suit there.

What do ya'll think?

 

[dant]

Just a thought: Should you try to get your money first from Pepin?
Isn't "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush?"

 

[Erna]

[quote author=Laura]
What do ya'll think?
[/quote]

One of my mottos in life is ”Always bully a bully back”.

 

[1984]

Just a thought: Should you try to get your money first from Pepin?
Isn't "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush?"

Hi dant -

As Laura says below: "And, of course, when we get our payout from Pepin". :)

 

[dant]

Ah - missed that!
Thanks for pointing that out!

 

[Laura]

Just a thought: Should you try to get your money first from Pepin?
Isn't "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush?"

That's kind of automatic - it's part of the statute under which the dismissal was granted. In other words, when he lost, he automatically owed us every cent of what we had to spend to defend ourselves against him.

Of course, he can appeal - and then owe us more money because he isn't likely to win - or he can quibble over amounts via his attorneys, but he HAS to pay. And, since he filed in Oregon - where his business is - and lost in Oregon, he'll basically have to pony up or all his assets can be seized.

Like I said before, he really should have taken our settlement offer - at least then he would have gotten something for his money. (I was feeling the upcoming holiday spirit at that moment I guess). I may even feel generous if he just pays up and goes away.

Another really interesting thing is that, as psychic as he claims to be, with his "psychic pill" and all that, he didn't see this outcome - but the Cs did; accurately, I should add.

 

[dant]

Truly amazing, to say the least!

Thanks for your wonderful explanations, as we might all learn from
your experiences! Some of us might have never known what to do,
should we as individuals, be faced with a lawsuit (from a petty tyrant),
such as yours.

Kind regards,
Dan

 

[Laura]

It would be helpful, though, if some of ya'll would read the judges order and offer some analyses. I'm not sure it's worth the time or money. We often think that Vinnie has actually done us more good than harm - it's great advertising, that's for sure!

 

[GRiM]

It would be helpful, though, if some of ya'll would read the judges order and offer some analyses. I'm not sure it's worth the time or money. We often think that Vinnie has actually done us more good than harm - it's great advertising, that's for sure!

Would it not be a open and shut case? All the evidence in form of emails and documents should be enough. I'm sure it would require some work, but might be worth it just to see how his mind sidesteps and denies reality :)

 

[mamadrama]

I've read Judge Haggerty's decision several times and have extracted a few general principles from it that I would like some feedback on.

It would be helpful, though, if some of ya'll would read the judges order and offer some analyses. I'm not sure it's worth the time or money.

Have the extracts from his decision been posted here yet?

 

[dant]

I am not a lawyer - so my statements are merely `opinion', not
statements of facts, implied or otherwise :)

Opinions: http://quantumfuturegroup.org/HBI_Case_Documents/Sott_opinion_revised.pdf

From what I have read, the order is/was pretty clear as to what constitutes
defamation, libel, etc... but what is interesting is a piecemeal dissection
of the plaintiff's claims v.s. the defendant's right to Anti-SLAPP motions
to strike, all pretty detailed. It proceeds in orderly fashion, the dissecting
of each claim, but what is interesting - is the analysis focusing on SLAPP as
of "public Interest" protections, then on CDA for each of the defendants from
the moderators who qualifies for CDA protections, to Laura who does not qualify
for CDA protections, and then to her alleged ties to the corporation as a 'controller'
of context and content. The court has stated that her statements were of `opinions'
protected by the 1st amendment (if I got that right) *and* the failure of the plaintiff
to prove a `prima facie' case, i.e. to produce substantial evidence that there is a
probability that it will prevail on each claim, which they apparently failed to do.

It appears to me, that if you should file suit against another party for
libel, defamation, etc..., you would need to make sure you have a `prima facie'
case, that you can provide factual evidence (data) for each of your claims,
case precedences supporting your claim(s), and that you can prove a high
probability of prevailing on each claim. This is a pretty high standard for the
plaintiff, but that is what lawyers are for!

I wonder what it would cost to have your lawyers p/review your case to
establish whether or not, you have a case, and perhaps if they might be willing
to waive the preliminary cost for p/review in exchange for some percentage
of the outcome, should they win your case?

Wishful thinking perhaps, but what do I know? I am not a lawyer! ;)

Dan

 

[Gimpy]

It would be helpful, though, if some of ya'll would read the judges order and offer some analyses. I'm not sure it's worth the time or money. We often think that Vinnie has actually done us more good than harm - it's great advertising, that's for sure!

Would it not be a open and shut case? All the evidence in form of emails and documents should be enough. I'm sure it would require some work, but might be worth it just to see how his mind sidesteps and denies reality :)

I don't know Grim. To proceed with a suit just because it would be potentially 'open and shut', or even 'to see how his mind side steps reality'....sounds too close to revenge, even though its NOT. Any pathological looks for ways to turn a 'loss' into a 'win', and my concern is that a suit, even one that is won in Laura's favor, will be turned against her as some sort of vindication or martyrdom-like spin.

Yes, that's a stretch and it sounds ridiculous, but I've seen pathological people spin far worse events.

Vinnie et al have nothing to energize their madness, I see no reason to give them any opening to do so.

Those are just my instincts and horse sense talking though.