[BartSimpson]

In general the courts have dismissed libel cases involving internet forums so long as the libel is against an avatar and not the identity of a real person.

So I can say that "Superman" on the forums is a crack-smoking wanker and that's not libel. But if I go to the trouble of finding his real name and I say that "Superman" = Bob Smith and he's a crack-smoking wanker then that is most definitely libel...unless, of course, I prove in court that old Bob really is a crack-smoking wanker.

That's the downside of suing someone for libel is that they get to prove that what they said was true.

[Proculation]

If that someone said it while thinking it was true, that's not libel.

[Curtman]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

In general the courts have dismissed libel cases involving internet forums so long as the libel is against an avatar and not the identity of a real person.

So I can say that "Superman" on the forums is a crack-smoking wanker and that's not libel. But if I go to the trouble of finding his real name and I say that "Superman" = Bob Smith and he's a crack-smoking wanker then that is most definitely libel...unless, of course, I prove in court that old Bob really is a crack-smoking wanker.

That's the downside of suing someone for libel is that they get to prove that what they said was true.

Anti-racism activist wins libel judgment

$1:

She found that Mr. Fromm's comments were designed to hold Mr. Warman up to ridicule. He published them, she said, "either knowing the fundamental falseness of the accusations he levelled at Mr. Warman, or being reckless as to the truth of these." This "steady diet of diatribe and insults, couched in half truths and omissions" amounted to malice on Mr. Fromm's part, she said.

[BartSimpson]

$1:

Mr. Fromm's dominant motive, Judge Métivier said in her ruling, was to attack Mr. Warman personally in retaliation for his use of legal processes to restrain illegal speech.

The intent was to attack someone personally.

That's not the same as me slamming "Superman" as a High Priest of Censorship wihout knowing who the real person is.

On an aside, this Mr. Warman is pretty pathetic if he's made 10 complaints to the CHRC and can't stand up to internet bullies on his own.

[Curtman]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

$1:

Mr. Fromm's dominant motive, Judge Métivier said in her ruling, was to attack Mr. Warman personally in retaliation for his use of legal processes to restrain illegal speech.

The intent was to attack someone personally.

That's not the same as me slamming "Superman" as a High Priest of Censorship wihout knowing who the real person is.

On an aside, this Mr. Warman is pretty pathetic if he's made 10 complaints to the CHRC and can't stand up to internet bullies on his own.

It's the same stupid game. He wants to broadcast lies to the world about me. I'm not going to stop him. He does a great job of expressing his callous hatred. He's a person that should be fighting the same people I do. Instead he wants to bicker about something that I was involved with almost 20 years ago that I did to try to make a difference, and to make things better for my community. He represents all Keystone cops who are busy chasing their tails while criminals prosper.

[EyeBrock]

Here you go hurley;

Posted by curtman on Fri Dec 11, 2009 . There are a few more where he tells us that transporting pot for gain isn't trafficking.

$1:

For a living? When did I say that? I was a kid who got a free car to move pot around a few times a month. I've held a job since I was a child earning $4 a week to deliver the community newspaper.

His words. No lies, just curtmans version of events.

He got a 'free' car to move pot. In Canada it's called drug trafficking. The Crown rests.

Here's him sluffing it off.

$1:

You go on and give it a go.. Call the cops, and tell them a guy on a forum drove an unknown quantity of pot across town 15 years ago. Record it, I'd love to hear the response.

All curtmans posts. Easy enough to find, I just wanted to see him dig his hole a bit deeper as his hypocritical posts of his being a law-abiding citizen spewed forth from his biased and anti-cop persona.

Personally I don't really care about his criminal past. Most crims I've met are pretty decent besides the few mistakes they have made. Others are just nasty pieces of work.

What does grate is him pretending he's a solid citizen who has no beef with the cops when he obviously does.

Dig us all up a few more anti-cop youtube videos curt.

After all ,you and your little gang who were nowhere near Toronto on Sat/Sun obviously know more than I do.
I only spent 17 hour days dealing with all this. On the lines, being spat at and yelled at by people of a very similar ilk to some of you posting on here.

Curtman is no different than those who came to Toronto to just scream hatred at the cops and had no cause to protest other than they hate cops. We saw you all loud and clear and we have your measure.

Curtman, you have lied so many times on CKA that you just 'aint credible anymore.

Hurley, make sure your brain is in gear before you post in protection of curt.

[Curtman]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Personally I don't really care about his criminal past.

What criminal past? Seriously, I don't know how many resources you've wasted looking into my "criminal past", but you will not find one. I got a speeding ticket once for going 62 when the posted limit was 50. That's about it.

[EyeBrock]

Curtman Curtman:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Personally I don't really care about his criminal past.

What criminal past? Seriously, I don't know how many resources you've wasted looking into my "criminal past", but you will not find one. I got a speeding ticket once for going 62 when the posted limit was 50. That's about it.

Trafficking.

You might not have got caught but it's still criminal. And it's in your past is it not?

Therefore 'criminal past'. It's English.

No resources wasted. Just the search function on your CKA posts. Don't be so paranoid. You are not that important.

[BartSimpson]

EyeBrock 1, Curtman 0

[Curtman]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

You might not have got caught but it's still criminal.

Got caught? I'm the one who told the police about it. It would probably be still happening now otherwise.

[EyeBrock]

The sinner sought salvation. Well done curt.

[Curtman]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

The sinner sought salvation. Well done curt.

They probably let you carry around a loaded weapon too right?

[EyeBrock]

Oh you are doing the 'last word' thing now. Ok you win.

You post something silly next and we can say it was the last word.

We can do 'holding our breath' or a 'hard stare' contest too if you want, I'll blink so you feel better.

Scurry away now curt, with the tatters of your credibility flapping about in the internet wind.

[BartSimpson]

Curtman Curtman:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

The sinner sought salvation. Well done curt.

They probably let you carry around a loaded weapon too right?

Uh, yeah. He's a cop, remember?

[Curtman]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Uh, yeah. He's a cop, remember?

Yeah.. Frightening. To serve and protect. Or to malign and misrepresent depending on the issue.