The following post was made by incompetent attorney (soon to be disbarred for unethical behavior) Susan Basko. The responses in ALL CAPS are corrections to her many deliberate lies.
CLIFF’S NOTES ON COURT CASESsaid:
July 28, 2014 at 12:41 am
CLIFF’S NOTES ON “MCGIBNEY VS THE INTERNETZ”
Note: We have tried our best for accuracy, though we make no claims. If there is any inaccuracy, please post below and let us know. Any inaccuracy is unintentional.
YEA RIGHT, THIS ENTIRE POST YOU PUT UP IS FULL OF DELIBERATE LIES AND YOU KNOW IT.
James McGibney is an exceptionally litigious person, who baosts about filing lawsuits. He owns Via View, a company that runs a revenge porn/ extortion website (Cheaterville) and a hate speech / harassment website (Bullyville). McGibney pretends that he runs an anti-revenge porn site and an anti-bullying site, but this is only for fools to believe.
APPARENTLY YOU DON’T UNDERTAND THE DEFINITION OF REVENGE PORN MUCH LESS HATE SPEECH. THE ONLY FOOLS ARE THOSE THAT BELIEVE THE SHIT YOU’RE SHOVELING.
There are at least 2 known lawsuits against Via View filed by victims of Cheaterville. One involved a married couple and another involved a doctor. Both had been extremely defamed and harassed on Cheaterville. It is said both cases have settled.
THERE ARE NO KNOWN LAWSUITS AGAINST VIAVIEW OR CHEATERVILLE. ANY SUITS THAT WERE BROUGHT WERE DROPPED ONCE THE PLAINTIFS REALIZED VIAVIEW/CHEATERVILLE WERE NOT AT FAULT AND ARE PROTECTED UNDER CDA 230. THIS IS YET ANOTHER LIE. McGIBNEY, VIAVIEW, AND CHEATERVILLE ARE NOT NAMED CURRENTLY IN “ANY” LAWSUITS OF ANY OF THESE CHEATERVILLE “VICTIMS” YOU MENTION. THERE HAVE BEEN NO SETTLEMENTS PAID BY VIAVIEW/CHEATERVILLE, OR McGIBNEY TO ANY PARTIES NAMED IN THOSE, NOW DROPPED, LAWSUITS.
In addition, Via View is said to be under investigation by the FBI and California Attorney General.
NO IT ISN’T. THIS IS AN UNSUPPORTED LIE THAT THOMAS RETZLAFF CONTINUES TO MAKE.
About a year ago, some people whose daughters had been put by McGibney onto his revenge porn site politely contacted the advertisers on the site asking them to look at the site they were sponsoring. All the sponsors dropped their ads. McGibney claimed this caused him a loss of $20,000 per month. He then began to sue random people, claiming they are all in a big conspiracy and trying to stop their First Amendment rights. One focus of the lawsuits and TROs has been a blog run by the folks who contacted the advertisers. This is called BV Files.
THAT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED AT ALL. THE SPONSORS DROPPED THEIR ADS AFTER BEING HARASSED BY TOM RETZLAFF, LORA LUSHER AND OTHERS. THE CURRENT LAWSUIT IS FOR THE DELIBERATE AND MALICIOUS LIES THAT WERE USED TO HARASS THESE SPONSORS, VIAVIEW’S BOARD OF DIRECTORS, THEIR FAMILIES, AND INTERFER WITH McGIBNEY’S BUSINESS. THE LAWSUIT IS NOT AGAINST “RANDOM” PEOPLE. THE FACT THERE IS A CONSPIRACY CAN AND WILL BE PROVEN IN COURT. THE BLOG IS RUN BY TOM RETZLAFF AND HIS COHORTS, A FACT THAT CAN AND WILL ALSO BE PROVEN IN COURT.
COURT CASES in recent months:
VIA VIEW VS THOMAS RETZLAFF, NEAL RAUHAUSER, LORA LUSHER, LANE LIPTON, @MISSANONNEWS, ETC., AND DOES. State court in Tarrant County, Texas. Filed by John Morgan, Jay Leiderman, and Marc Randazza. Randazza claimed on Twitter he was not part of it. The causes of action were defamation, interference with business, etc. Neal Rauhauser filed an Anti-SLAPP motion through attorney Jeffrey Dorrell. The plaintiffs nonsuited and filed a new suit in CA in Federal court. The nonsuit was ineffective because the anti-SLAPP was filed first. The Anti-SLAPP says the lawsuit was filed to stop Neal Rauhauser’s Freedom of Speech. The Judge did not rule on the motion. The motion was then sent to Texas appellate court. While the motion was pending, a twitter person who appears to be associated with McGibney, called @CattyIdiot, posted calling Jeffrey Dorrell a KKK member and pedophile. (Dorrell is a Conservative gay Republican.) Dorrell filed an emergency paper to let the Judge know of the abuse.
WHERE THIS CASE STANDS: Awaiting the decision of the TX Appellate court on the Anti-SLAPP. Neal Rauhauser has asked for $1 million in damages as a means to stop McGibney from frivolous litigation. No one was served in this court case, but Neal filed the Anti-SLAPP through his lawyer. Neal also obtained an affidavit from Thomas Retzlaff saying they do not know each other (and therefore, allegations of a conspiracy are incorrect).
IT WILL BE PROVEN THAT RAUHAUSER DID IN FACT KNOW RETZLAFF AND THAT HE PERJURED HIMSELF IN THE TEXAS COURT CASE. RAUHAUSERS STORY ABOUT HOW HE CAME TO HIRE DORRELL CAN BE PROVEN A LIE. THERE ARE OTHER DOCUMENTS THAT WILL PROVE NEAL CONSPIRED WITH RETZLAFF TO DAMAGE McGIBNEY’S BUSINESS INTERESTS.
McGibney’s attorney, John Morgan was charged with perjury and was replaced by attorney Paul Gianni. At a court hearing for the anti-SLAPP, Gianni filed a 500 page Conspiracy Theory document, claiming all the random unconnected people being sued were related in a grand conspiracy.
NO, GIANNI FILED A BRIEF WITH DOCUMENTS TO BACK UP THE REASON FOR THE TEXAS CASE BUT THE FOCUS WAS AND REMAINS ON WHY AN ANTI-SLAPP WAS FILED WHEN (1) RAUHAUSER WAS NEVER SERVED AND (2) BOTH RAUHAUSER AND HIS ATTORNEY KNEW AND ADMITTED THEY KNEW THE CASE HAD BEEN MOVED TO CALIFORNIA. THE JUDGE HAS DELAYED RULING ON THIS CASE FOR A VERY IMPORTANT REASON, ONE THAT MS. BASKO, MR. RAUHAUSER, AND RETZLAFF ARE TRYING TO DESPERATELY IGNORE.
VIA VIEW VS THOMAS RETZLAFF, NEAL RAUHAUSER, LANE LIPTON, MISSANONNEWS, ETC., AND DOES. Federal court, Northern District of California, San Jose. Filed by Jason Leiderman. This case is basically the same as the one in Texas, except with a slight shuffling of those being sued. It is a random group of unconnected people. Lane Lipton (resident of New York, said to be a writer and former girlfriend of Ron Brynaert, former editor of Raw News and Twitter character ) was served and filed an Anti-SLAPP and a Motion to Dismiss . That is pending. WHERE THIS CASE STANDS: Lane Lipton’s anti-SLAPP pending.
ANTI-SLAPPS ARE TO HALT DISCOVERY: The ongoing Anti-SLAPP motions are supposed to stop discovery. To get around this, Leiderman began filing abusive California Workplace Violence cases. One case was filed in County of Ventura against Joseph Camp of Groton, New York, a former hacker who was on supervised release. The other case was filed in County of Santa Clara in the City of San Jose, against Thomas Retzlaff.
INCORRECT, THE TRO’S WERE FILED BEFORE THE ANTI-SLAPP’S AND WERE FILED DUE TO BOTH THREATS AND ONGOING INTERFERENCE IN McGIBNEY’S BUSINESS.
VIA VIEW VS JOSEPH CAMP, COUNTY OF VENTURA, CA. Leiderman and his crew of stalkers from Anonymous and Rustle League began harassing Joe Camp 24/7. Leiderman harassed Joe Camp’s parole officer, his foster mom, his local police, state police and on and on. The Leiderman filed the California Workplace Violence TRO. There was no workplace violence and no chance of any, since Joe Camp lives in NY and is nonviolent. What Leiderman sought was made clear by the court orders he sought in the case: He wanted the court to order Joe Camp to stop researching about Via View, to stop writing about Via View, to remove his postings about Via View, and to remove the mirror of the BV files blog that was allegedly on Joe’s website.
INCORRECT. CAMP INITITIATED HARASSMENT OF BOTH RUSTLE LEAGUE, LEIDERMAN, McGIBNEY AND A HOST OF OTHERS INCLUDING A FLORIDA ATTORNEY AND AN UNRELATED MOTHER OF 3 CHILDREN IN ALLEN TX. THE TRO’S WERE IN RESPONSE TO CAMP’S HARRASSMENT NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
Leiderman and his crew harassed Joe Camp and everyone associated with him, to get Joe arrested and served with court case at same time (so Joe would not be able to file an Answer). Joe had written and filed a 150-page Answer and then was arrested on the parole violation of staying out all night. Joe was staying out in terror. Someone (a woman whose identity is known and who lives in New Jersey) associated to the Leiderman/ McGibney camp had posted a horrific website in Joe’s name calling him and his family members and church members pedophiles and child rapists, giving detailed, false stories of rapes of children, and listing all of their names, addresses, social security numbers, etc. Links to this horrific website were tweeted out. Other things were done to terrorize Joe, to put him in fear of going home. Thus he stayed out and was arrested on parole violation of staying out. When Joe was arrested, the woman who had posted the terrorizing website tweeted, “We won!”
OF COURSE NO PROOF IS PROVIDED OF THIS MYSTERIOUS “WOMAN FROM NEW JERSEY” EXCEPT FOR OF COURSE IN RAUHAUSER’S DREAMS.
Leiderman had a group of trolls from Anonymous and Rustle League write letters to Joe’s judge in NY. The Judge specifically stated that he did not take the letters into consideration in making his decision and the parole supervisor who had colluded with Leiderman on the collection of the letters was not allowed to participate in the discussions.
SEVERAL OF THE PEOPLE WHO WERE HARASSED BY CAMP FOR NO REASON DID IN FACT CHOOSE TO WRITE LETTERS TO HIS PROBATION JUDGE BECAUSE IT WAS CLEAR CAMP HAD NOT LEARNED HIS LESSSON FROM THE LAST TIME IN PRISON.
Leiderman also filed Conspiracy Theory papers in the Via View vs. Camp Workplace Violence case, showing Leiderman’s grave disrespect for attorney Susan Basko, who had represented Joe Camp months earlier when Leiderman filed a false police report against Joe Camp. The police had dismissed the complaint, then Leiderman began severely harassing and defaming Ms. Basko. The Judge in Ventura was not buying into the abusive Conspiracy Theory nonsense.
INTERESTING SO SUE NOW STATES SHE REPRESENTED CAMP, EVEN THOUGH SHE IS NOT LICENSED IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK. VERY INTERESTING INDEED SUE.
WHERE THIS CASE STANDS (Via View Vs Camp): After reading Joe’s Answer, the Workplace Violence court in Ventura refused to make court orders that would affect Joe’s First Amendment rights. The court ordered him to stay 100 feet from McGibney, etc., people whom Joe Camp had never met and had no plans to go see.
CAMP ALSO HAS A TRO WITH REGARDS TO THE FLORIDA ATTORNEY HE HARASSED AND STALKED.
In the parole violation, Joe was sentenced to 5 months. Side note: Leiderman told the Judge in the Via View vs Retzlaff case that Joe Camp was going to prison for “10 to 20 years.” That is just one small example…
VIA VIEW VS RETZLAFF, WORKPLACE VIOLENCE CASE, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, SAN JOSE. This is similar to the other Workplace Violence case involving Joe Camp, but this is against Thomas Retzlaff, a man whom Leiderman, McGibney, Captien Obvious and @CattyIdiot have been severely defaming and demonizing for many months. Via View/ McGibney hope to stop the BV Files blog, except, the blog Admins have stated numerous times that Thomas Retzlaff has nothing to do with the blog. Thomas Retzlaff is a straw man that Leiderman and McGibney are using to try to get court orders to stop the BV Files blog and other communications about Via View.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE DEFAMED RETZLAFF WHEN EVERYTHING THAT THE ABOVE MENTIONED INDIVIDUALS HAVE POSTED AOUBT HIM IS 100% TRUTHFUL, ACCURATE, AND CAN BE PROVEN. RETZLAFF IS BEHIND THE BLOG, IT CAN BE PROVEN 100% HE IS BEHIND THE BLOG. ANYONE WHO BELIEVES OTHERWISE IS A FOOL.
During a hearing in this case on May 12, 2014, Leiderman told the Judge that Rolling Stone magazine was planning to do a story, and he feared that if people were not stopped from speaking about McGibney, that Rolling Stone might renege. This made it grossly apparent that the motivation behind this false Workplace Violence TRO case was to try to get court orders to stop First Amendment rights.
THAT IS NOT WHAT THE COURT TRANSCRIPTS STATE.
Thomas Retzlaff was served in Arizona. He has responded with a flurry of motions, including an ex parte motion for a continuance, a motion to quash the summons, and rumors of an Anti-SLAPP motion upcoming. Retzlaff also filed a paper alerting the judge to alleged perjury by McGibney at earlier hearings. The first judge was removed by Retzlaff’s preemptory challenge. The second judge recused herself. The third judge should be hearing the case. The third judge usually works in complex litigation.
AH FINALLY SOMEONE ADMITS RETZLAFF WAS PROPERLY SERVED DESPITE HIM STATING OTHERWISE. RETZLAFF MAY “ALEDGE” PERJURY, HE WILL BE UNABLE TO PROVE IT.
Leiderman, on behalf of McGibney, filed a bizarre and wild Conspiracy Theory in the case, trying to have non-parties held in contempt of non-existent court orders.
THE COURT ORDERS EXISTED, BUT HAVE BEEN DISOBEYED BY THE PARTIES THEY WERE ISSUED AGAINST. I’M SURE THE JUDGE WILL APPRECIATE HAVING HIS COURT DISRESPECTED IN SUCH A MANNER.
One of those abused in this way by Leiderman was attorney Susan Basko, who then filed a Declaration stating she is not a party, etc.
REALLY, PERHAPS MS. BASKO SHOULD KEEP HER SNOOT OUT OF THE CASE IN THE FIRST PLACE SINCE SHE IS NOT A “PARTY TO THE CASE” BUT CONTINUES TO INSERT HERSELF INTO IT.
Ms. Basko then took serious remedial steps to stem the abusive, malicious, dishonest actions of Leiderman. Ms. Basko has absolutely nothing to do with the case; Leiderman was harassing Ms Basko, sending her emails accusing her of being a terrorist in a conspiracy to kill him. Leiderman tried to convince the Judge at a May 12 hearing that such crazy things were true. Leiderman’s actual goal, which can be seen in his emails to Ms. Basko, was to attack her for writing a blog post on her Subliminal Ridge blog that did a legal analysis of federal racketeering law and mentioned Via View.
Many other people were named in the Conspiracy Theories concocted by Leiderman, and they have retained lawyers and are taking remedial actions.
MS. BASKO LIED TO LAW ENFORCEMENT ABOUT THIS AND IS EMBARRASSED HER ABUSIVE AND LIBELOUS EMAILS HAVE BEEN PUBLICIZED AND IS NOW LASHING OUT DUE TO A SEVERE CASE OF EMBARRASSMENT AND BUTT HURT.
WHERE THIS CASE STANDS (Via View vs Retzlaff Workplace Violence): The upcoming anti-SLAPP filed by Retzlaff should halt the case. If the anti-SLAPP is denied, the motion will move to appellate court.
SUBPOENAS ON TWITTER ACCOUNTS, EMAIL ACCOUNTS, BLOGS, ETC. Leiderman issued a flurry of abusive subpoenas. The General Counsel of Twitter wrote a harsh, 3-page letter to Leiderman explaining why his subpoenas were abusive.
AND YET IT APPEARS THAT SOME OF THESE SUBPOENAS WILL IN FACT MOVE FORWARD. INTERESTING YES?
Leiderman subpoenaed private emails of attorney Susan Basko from Kirsten Olsen, a lawyer who is in collusion with McGibney and Via View. Ms. Basko was given no notice of this abusive subpoena. Leiderman then promptly posted Ms. Basko’s personal and legal, very private emails on the internet, posting links to them on Twitter. Ms. Basko then filed a Bar Complaint and may take other remedial action.
MS. OLSEN TURNED THE EMAILS OVER OF HER OWN ACCORD AFTER SEEING FIRST HAND THE IMPROPER ACTIONS OF MS. BASKO. MS. BASKO CONTINUES TO WHINE ABOUT HER EMAILS BEING MADE PUBLIC WHEN SHE HAS NO RIGHT OR EXPECTATION OF SUCH COMMUNICATION BEING PRIVATE BECAUSE (1) THE EMAILS WERE NOT IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS AN ATTORNEY AND (2) THE OTHER PARTY DID NOT CONSENT TO ANY ASSERTATIONS OF CONFIDENTIALITY.
MissAnonNews, through an attorney, filed an objection to an abusive subpoena against her twitter account. Leiderman sought and got a court order telling her to appear in court in San Jose in Via View vs Retzlaff. This is against basic CA procedural law, as she is out of state and far away, aside from which, there is no basis for requiring her to attend this unrelated, false workplace violence case.
WHERE THIS STANDS: It looks like very few, if any, of the subpoenas resulted in any materials being turned over, other than from Kirsten Olsen, who openly admits to being a long time Via View operative.
TIME WILL TELL ON THAT ONE.
RETZLAFF VS LEIDERMAN, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA. Thomas Retzlaff filed suit against McGibney’s lawyer, Jason Leiderman, for defaming him online. The defamation was ongoing, shocking, and horrendous, potentially viewed by Leiderman’s 6,000+ twitter followers and possibly by the 1.6 million followers of @YourAnonNews, a large Anonymous (hacker group) account either owned by Leiderman or to which he has posting access. WHERE THIS STANDS: Case just beginning.
LEIDERMAN DID NOT “DEFAME” RETZLAFF. HE ACCUSED HIM OF BEING A CONVICTED SEX OFFENDER. COURT DOCUMENTS ABOUT RETZLAFF SUPPORT THIS COMMENT. RETZLAFF DID IN FACT BRUTALLY SEXUALLY ASSAULT HIS EX WIFE, AN ACT HE RECORDED ON VIDEOTAPE AND WHICH WAS ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE.