PLEASE NOTE: This blog is a bigotry free zone open to all persons, regardless of age, race, religion, color, national origin, sex, political affiliations, marital status, physical or mental disability, age, or sexual orientation. Further, this blog is open to the broad variety of opinions out there and will not delete any comments based upon point of view. However, comments will be deleted if they are worded in an abusive manner and show disrespect for the intellectual process.

Friday, May 8, 2015


January 20, 2014

Susanne Posel reported that,

"The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that bloggers have the same 1st Amendment rights as established journalists when involved in a defamation of character suit; as long as the issue is of public concern.
The outcome of this case establishes the fact that protections afforded the news media are not exclusive to their realm, but are also extended to citizen journalists and bloggers.
The decision was entered because of a defamation lawsuit brought in Oregon concerning a blogger who had written online that this person had “criminally mis-handled a bankruptcy case”.
In this instance, the trustee was not a public figure; however it was ruled that this case is of public concern and the negligence standard was applied.
Two years ago, Crystal Cox, an “investigative blogger” was sued by Kevin Padrick for writing online that Padrick was guilty of “fraud, corruption, money-laundering and other illegal activities.”
US District Court Judge Marco Hernandez originally denied Cox the right of journalistic protection..."

For more on this important topic, please click on the link below:


  1. While ALL journalists, writers, bloggers, etc - whether publishing under a third party professional umbrella, or one they share in via personal experience and extension, or possibly both - need to be ever mindful of possible defamatory descriptions or allegations, it is also axiomatic that the TRUTH is an absolute defense in any defamation suit. (so is 'opinion', but I suspect in the case you cited above, the 'criminal' allegations - in fact using the very word itself - are what prompted the suit in the first place).
    So where do we think that leaves the grassroots blogging, reporting, testimonies, and/or personal sworn affidavits submitted to, say, the Chief Disciplinary counsel or Judiciary Council in the Nutmeg State? Your site and others for example?
    Shall more of us come out of the woodwork heretofore afraid?

    I hope you will comment on what you personally believe the upshot of this case will impact CT. Particularly under the growing scrutiny that the recent US Attorney Task Force has announced and hopefully won't be mere window dressing?

  2. You are very good at referencing sites for further readership within your reporting. It is also noteworthy that Wikipedia can likewise be referenced as well, recognizing that no journalist or blogging reporting entity contains all info, but can link same. Wiki cites it too under "Obsidian Finance Group LLC v. Cox" and your own readers can go from there, as well as your own links.