RSS

Category Archives: Advocacy

CELEBRITIES AND ADLLAW

CELEBRITIES AND ADLLAW

Celebrities and AdLLawThe other day I received a communication that moved me to write this column. The communication wondered why celebrities are prominently mentioned in AdLLaw’s mission to protect the deceased from defamation. Actually, it went beyond wondering why celebrities are included; it went so far as to suggest that celebrities should be excluded. The recommendation was that our focus should be on the average citizen with whom the masses can identify.

AdLLaw uses many people as examples of those who are being defamed after they have passed on. Celebrity examples include Betty Ford, Michael Jackson, Steve Jobs, Whitney Houston, and Amy Winehouse. We also have in our materials records of a young woman who was killed in a terrible car accident whose family endured seeing vile and horrific information being spread on the Internet about their relative.

Read more here: http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3872556&page=1

We have information on U.S. soldiers whose funerals were picketed by a religious group that used the funerals as a platform to spread their bigotry and hate. The group picketing the funerals of fallen soldiers is not aiming their hate at the individual; however, their actions are mentioned in our materials because they bring hardship to the families of the soldiers in the form of added grief and suffering. One father did try to sue for damages, citing, among other things, the intentional infliction of emotional distress. See more here:

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/36449471/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/dad-sues-thank-god-dead-soldiers-church/#.VUD_qiFViko

Above are listed just a few examples of the defamation of those who are deceased. They range from the most high-profile celebrities to soldiers fighting for our country to anonymous citizens living their private lives. Defamation can touch anyone, and while there is truth in the fact that most people do not know a celebrity and cannot relate to their lifestyles, we can all identify who they are. For that reason, when they are defamed we are more aware and more attention is given.

Several years ago. Dale Earnhardt, a NASCAR icon, was killed in a shocking accident while racing at Daytona (Florida). The accident happened on live television during the race broadcast. Millions of people saw it play out in their living rooms. Dale Earnhardt was a name so synonymous with the sport that almost everyone could identify him. There was a tremendous amount of coverage of his life and death, and the public outpouring of grief and emotion was incredible. My local radio station had a discussion about the event, and people called in commenting on how wrong it was to feel grief for this man who was killed when the focus of our sorrow should be on our troops. I don’t normally call in to talk shows; however, in this instance I did. I was one of those who saw this horrible accident happen. I explained that when people can put a face to a name, and when they see a tragedy happen in real time, it affects them on a different level. People could identify with what happened. It did not mean there was no sorrow for our fallen troops, but the masses do not have faces to put with a soldier who has died, and they don’t see war played out live in their living rooms. That was why there was so much public grief for Mr. Earnhardt: people could relate.

I use the Dale Earnhardt example to explain why celebrities are a part of the AdLLaw campaign. People are aware of the stories of celebrities and may be outraged at the treatment a celebrity receives in the media. One of the problems with the media is the assumption that celebrities cease to be human once they are famous. A celebrity is still a person…they have lives to live; they have feelings; they have loved ones; they deal with the normal issues of being a human being. They deserve the same respect that any human should receive. That is why they are included in AdLLaw’s mission. Not because they are famous, but because they are human.

People are more aware of the treatment Michael Jackson received in the media than they are of the treatment of Nicole Catsouras, the young woman killed in the car accident. The grief endured by the family of Ms. Catsouras is no less important than the grief endured by the family of Mr. Jackson; it is simply that the masses are more aware of Mr. Jackson’s plight.

The goal of AdLLaw is to change the law nationally so that a family can sue for damages when their deceased loved one is defamed. While living, a defamed person can seek relief for themselves in a court of law for slander and libel. However, at the point of death, current law considers the person to no longer exist. That leaves the gates wide open for anyone to maliciously report untrue “information” about the deceased without fear of repercussions. AdLLaw believes that a person lives on in his or her legacy and reputation. When a person, famous or anonymous, is defamed after they are gone, their loved ones should have a way to seek relief in a court of law.

Perhaps when AdLLaw is successful in its mission, we will be one step closer to becoming a kinder and gentler society. Maybe respect and honor will be restored in our media. There might be a return to integrity in reporting and to thought put into words before they are spoken or written — not just in the media, but by each individual also.

The following video sums up why celebrities are included in this initiative. We are all people; we are all a part of the human race. Regardless of our social status, race, sexual orientation, nationality, political affiliation, or religious belief, we are all people — with the same right to dignity and respect after we have passed on. Watch the video here: http://video.foxnews.com/v/3934406/huckabees-opinion/?#sp=show-clips

AdLLaw’s mission is not to curtail freedom of speech, but to hold people accountable for their words. We believe this initiative and our fundamental right to free speech can coexist. To learn more about AdLLaw, please visit us at https://antidefamationlegacylawadvocates.org/2013/10/22/whats-so-special-about-the-adllaw-initiative-and-petition/

Support the #AdLLawInitiative by signing the PETITION

Edited and Republished by: MJ Brookins

Original story posted here:   http://thejamcafe-mjtpmagazine.presspublisher.org/issue/may-issue/article/celebrities-and-AdLLaw

May Issue, ADLLAW – Celebrities and AdLLaw

By Barbara Owens,Journalist and AdLLaw secretary –  Thu, May 31, 2012

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

THE STAIN OF AN ACCUSATION: CAN IT EVER BE REMOVED?

THE STAIN OF AN ACCUSATION: CAN IT EVER BE REMOVED?

Stain of An AccusationCan the stain of an accusation ever be removed although the accused may have been exonerated in a court of law? Many people including myself do not think so and I’ll explain why. A rose is still considered a rose regardless of the specific names given to each class of roses. It still looks like a rose.

An accusation is a charge of wrongdoing; imputation of guilt or blame. A stain is defined as a cause of reproach; stigma; blemish. Both sounds the same to me.

Let’s talk about stains for a minute. It is possible to cover up the appearance of blood stains but is the stain really gone? I found one Reader’s digest article HERE http://www.rd.com/slideshows/how-to-remove-blood-stains/ that gives us “8 Common Items That Remove Blood Stains”. The items include vinegar, ammonia, hydrogen peroxide (work only on fresh blood stains), cola, WD-40, cornstarch, talcum powder and cold salt water.

Article also states blood stains are relatively easy to remove before they set but can be nearly impossible to wash out after 24 hours and this is the significant problem with the aftermath of a stain. From this article and perhaps many others we understand that it is possible to remove stains, especially blood, if we act quickly but the problem remains: The stain is still there although we cannot see it and it is possible for the stain to be uncovered via other means or methods.

Then we have the chemical “Luminol” used by criminal investigators at violet crime scenes in hopes of discovering blood. Much of crime scene investigation, also called criminalistics, is based on the notion that nothing vanishes without a trace. This is particularly true of violent crime victims. A murderer can dispose of the victim’s body and mop up the pools of blood, but without some heavy-duty cleaning chemicals, some evidence will remain. Tiny particles of blood will cling to most surfaces for years and years, without anyone ever knowing they’re there.

Luminol At WorkThe basic idea of luminol is to reveal these traces with a light-producing chemical reaction between several chemicals and hemoglobin, an oxygen-carrying protein in the blood. The molecules break down and the atoms rearrange to form different molecules (see Microsoft Encarta: Chemical Reaction for more information on chemical reactions). In this particular reaction, the reactants (the original molecules) have more energy than the products (the resulting molecules). The molecules get rid of the extra energy in the form of visible light photons. This process, generally known as chemiluminescence, is the same phenomenon that makes fireflies and light sticks glow.

Investigators will spray a suspicious area, turn out all the lights and block the windows, and look for a bluish-green light. If there are any blood traces in the area, they will glow.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/luminol1.htm

So now we consider the ill effect of the “Stain of An Accusation”. Remember Michael Jackson, marked as a child molester, who seems to be a popular topic of conversation among admirers and skeptics. Many of his admirers are of the opinion or belief that if the accusations are ignored they will eventually disappear. I have to strongly disagree with that kind of thinking. Evil and negative thoughts are always present, though the evidence of it may remain dormant for long periods of time they are still there. Like blood stains may well go undetected to the naked eye they still exist.

Accusations of child molestation is not something to take nonchalantly and I sincerely believe it to be a stigma that will linger and Michael Jackson knew that too. An excerpt from the following people.com article: In 2003 Jackson Faced Charges He Had Molested a Child. He Was Found Not Guilty, but His Reputation Never Fully Recovered.   http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20292704,00.html

Indeed he seemed to emerge from the trial a broken man, the downward spiral of his life and career only accelerating. His friend Dr. Firpo Carr says that the singer, who spent his last years often traveling abroad and raising his children, continued to be tormented by the stain the accusations had left on his reputation. “It took a great toll on him,” says Carr. “He never recovered from the trial. He never did.” As Carr tells it, Jackson’s planned comeback was not just about money but about some attempt at personal redemption. “That was part of the reason for these concerts: to prove himself again,” says Carr, “to give something great to his fans, the show of all shows, and to have the comeback of all comebacks. This was so everyone would remember him for his music, not for the scandals. He didn’t get a chance to do that. But that’s what it was about.” 

“Never Recovered” is the most significant phrase in the excerpt above. That’s the after effect of the stain I speak of, the stain of a severely injured reputation that can never be repaired or removed. An accusation left unchecked causes the stain to enlarge its territory by way of ravenousness wolves. If the person being accused were living it would be up to them to address their accusers and still that may not halt the public indictments or remove the stain, but the possibility of defending oneself is greater. On the other hand what about the deceased and who will defend them? Who will speak on their behalf?

What can we use to remove that stain or to keep it from spreading further?  Only the existence of an “Antidefamation Legacy Law” to first, protect and preserve the “Legacy of those Deceased” and second to protect the “Sanity of the family members or those left behind”. Why not bring about legislation which will include the deceased among those who, when defamed, can have the same legal protection as the living; by giving their family members a statute upon which to base a civil cause of action?

We, The Anti-Defamation Legacy Law Advocates, see this initiative or law as any other; a possible deterrent for most and a tool for the more serious offenders. If a person is deceased nearly anything can be said or written about them. Even the non-famous can be targets which mean that we and our loved ones are at risk.

Intentional defamation of a decedent does more than just hurt their survivor’s feelings; it can endanger their health and welfare through false public perception, judgments and actions taken. We hold dear our First Amendment rights, but there is nothing in our Constitution about bearing false witness as a legal right.

Try as we have been doing for five years now we cannot do anything about the horrible stain that has been imputed to Michael but we can help his children and family by standing together in favor of this law.

Will you support the Anti-Defamation Legacy Law (AdLLaw) Initiative by signing the petition and contacting your two United States Senators and the President? https://antidefamationlegacylawadvocates.org/

http://www.exploreforensics.co.uk/detecting-evidence-after-bleaching.html

http://www.freestockimages.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/coffee-stain-texture.jpg

http://www.freestockimages.org/2010/10/03/free-stock-images-part-36-coffee-stain-textures/

“Alone we’re just an “Echo” in the mountains but TOGETHER we are the “Mountains”. Support the AdLLaw Initiative today.

Please support the #AdLLawInitiative by signing the petition AdLLaw Petition

MJ Brookins, AdLLaw Admin

March 7, 2015

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Here Comes A Thief (AdLLaw VideoBlog)

Here Comes A Thief (AdLLaw VideoBlog)

CadeFlawResSpec  S. Kendrick, a.k.a. Dial Dancer

Published on Feb 24, 2015

Direct links:
The Petition with goal spelled out: http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/prot…

Find your Senators & Contact them: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact…

Contact President: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/wri…

Share with family & friends:

Ask them to endorse the Initiative so it may become a law.

Help us educate about the unjust legal loophole which may affect you when it comes to your deceased loved one or yourself once you are gone.

 

Tags: , , , , ,

AdLLaw Editorial #2

AdLLaw Editorial #2

Like him or not, Bill O’Reilly is an influential person.  He has been a major contributor to the Fox News Network for decades.  He is known personally and professionally by all the movers and shakers in the world of Journalism and Television.

This man is being roasted over an open fire for his claims of time in combat and for having witnessed events it is said he did not. Former associates and people who touted they were always anti-O’Reilly are talking about this…NOW.

Bill O’Reilly made these claims years even decades ago, but no one disputed the claims…THEN. They stayed silent and let him carry on.  Other journalists are reporting they knew several of the stories were fabricated, but there are some problems with this.  The former associates or others may have an ax to grind with O’Reilly.  Many of these revelations are first reported by News Agencies which are known for “paying for a story”, taking a benign story and giving it negative connotations or sometimes soliciting “paid to lie” exposés.  Either the O’Reilly accusers are lying now or they lied then, by omission.

In most cases the lies like Brian Williams of NBC were self-serving to enhance his “street cred”.  However, it looks as if some of Bill O’Reilly’s tales may have done serious harm to one or more person’s ability to earn a living, move about comfortably in their normal environment and perhaps endangered their lives.  He is not the first Journalist who may have caused this kind of situation with his story telling and he is not alone by any means.

If you were to research deeply enough you may find an article or two from other Media sources who at the time supported even concurred with Mr. O’Reilly’s claims.

If these allegations are true then it shows a double standard which prevails in our News & Information arena.  Ignore or close ranks around one of their own, even when they do wrong and throw everyone else under the bus.

Our worldwide Media is inhabited by imperfect people, some who lie.  They lie to the public for personal gain of all kinds.  They present themselves to the public as the voice of reason, honesty and moral good.

I am not expecting perfection; however they do lie, sometimes with disastrous results.   Misrepresentations, justifications for promoting false impressions that influence our perceptions which cause faulty judgments and possible untoward acts on persons are theirs.

This editorial is not a condemnation of Bill O’Reilly, but of our Media.  It is a roast for every person who calls themselves Journalist or information Provider and reported falsely without checking facts or failed to report corrections; reported false stories with the intent to do harm or has taken part in activities which were criminal.

Even now our Media skillfully dodges any reports about which US Journalists and News agencies may have been involved in the hacking and official bribing scandal.

The purpose of the First Amendment Right was to allow our Media to report wrong doing without fear of reprisal.  It was not created to use this “Right” to do wrong without reprisal or punishment.

In order for a field which employs or provides a living to hundreds of thousands who purport themselves as servants of reliable and credible information our Media will have to do a lot better to regain our trust and respect.

By: S. Kendrick – a.k.a. Dial Dancer 2/27/2015

(This editorial is the views of its writer.  It does not reflect the views of all of the Members & Supporters of AdLLaw)

Photo for AdLLaw Editorial 2

 

Tags: , , , , ,

THE TIME IS NOW FOR ADLLAW/CADELAW TO BE SIGNED INTO LAW

THE TIME IS NOW FOR ADLLAW/CADELAW TO BE SIGNED INTO LAW

Time For AdLLaw is NOWMore and more the public is calling for the reigning in of intrusive police practices and tabloid news that constantly abuses the right to a free press and infringes on people’s privacy rights. During his lifetime, Michael Jackson endured extraordinary invasions of his privacy as a public figure, as well as slander and defamation of his character, to which he protested vigorously. Nor was it not long after his death on June 25, 2009, that the media started in on his family, especially his underage children. And while there is at least the possibility of legal remedy for the living, heretofore there has been none to protect the rights of the surviving family of the deceased. That is why CADELAW is a bill whose time has come.

In her 2010 book, Outrageous Invasions: Celebrities’ Private Lives, Media, and the Law, UConn law professor Robin D. Barnes devotes Chapter 10, “John Lennon and Michael Jackson: The Influence of the Superstar,” to discussing how because of the popularity bestowed by the media and fans on John Lennon and Michael Jackson, the two men became targets of deliberate attempts by governments to neutralize their cultural and political impact. Lennon’s youngest son, Sean, told the New Yorker magazine in 1998 that his father was considered a threat because of his influence: “If he had ever said bomb the White House tomorrow, there would’ve been 10,000 people who would have done it. Pacifists revolutionaries are historically killed by the government.” Barnes reports that “government impotency in relation to the potentially unbounded influence of the superstar,” means clandestine methods and tactics are to shape the “tone and tenor of public discourse.”

The case of Lennon, according to Barnes, leads to understanding how an “equally powerful superstar,” Michael Jackson was also considered a monumental threat to disrupting the status quo. Michael’s 1998, “Man in the Mirror” (written by Siedah Garrett with Glen Ballard), along with the revolutionary social and political message in the lyrics and in the images used in the short film that went along with it “put the world on notice,” according to Barnes.

But in the summer of 1994, when a confidential report of accusations of child molestation was leaked to Hard Copy tabloid reporter Diane Dimond from the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services, the ensuing media persecution began its relentless quest for ratings by using rumor and scandal. Already marginalized for his eccentricities, Michael was objectified, dehumanized, and finally demonized as the press cashed in. For example, Barnes cites Los Angeles criminal defense attorney, Tom Mesereau’s comments that tabloid huckster Nancy Grace’s coverage of the trial held in 2005 “was sub-moronic . . . [and that] she tried to spin a verdict through a lot of emotional innuendo that was just buffoonery.”

Barnes asserts that while trying to prove there was an “actual conspiracy to imprison Jackson” was elusive, the case could be made for Jackson being a convenient scapegoat to deflect heat off the Catholic Church because of the concurrent sexual abuse allegations against clergy of the Archdiocese of Boston. The massive investigation of the Catholic Church went on for several years before Jackson was again falsely accused and his Neverland ranch raided by 70 County Sheriff’s and members of Tom Sneddon’s District Attorney’s Office. All this to control Michael’s rising political influence.

From 1994 until he died, Michael endured relentless persecution from the media. Barnes asserts that while the U.S. Constitution grants free speech and freedom of the press, the Supreme Court fails to enforce the laws that require prerequisites to the proper exercise of those freedoms and the protection of constitutional rights. She notes that the media defends slander and defamation by asserting that the statements they make are true for the most part. False statements also get a pass as simply being reported or quoted, most often from anonymous, so-called inside sources.

Still, Michael is gone now and supposedly what the media writes or broadcasts can no longer hurt him. Obviously not, but it can and does hurt his young children, as well as other family members who share his name. For that reason, our representatives should be introduced to CADELAW and asked to vote to pass it to protect the rights of the family of the deceased.

Article written and submitted by: Sherry Walker Bryant

 Sherry Walker Bryant is a doctoral student at Ball State University in Muncie Indiana. She is designing an educational series called “Teaching Michael Jackson” to share her research and writing a book on Jackson’s worldwide charismatic influence.

Direct links:
The Petition with goal spelled out: http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/prot…

Find your Senators & Contact them: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact…

Contact President: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/wri…

Share with family & friends:

Ask them to endorse the Initiative so it may become a law.

Help us educate about the unjust legal loophole which may affect you when it comes to your deceased loved one or yourself once you are gone.

Video Credit: CadeFlawResSpec/Sharon Kendrick – a.k.a. Dial Dancer

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

AdLLaw Initiative 2014

AdLLaw Initiative 2014

Video Published on Nov 18, 2014 by LunaJo67
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on January 12, 2015 in AdLLaw Initiative, Advocacy, Videos

 

Tags: , , , ,

AdLLaw Editorial #1: Let’s get rid of slander laws

AdLLaw Editorial #1:  Let’s get rid of slander laws


Dials AdLLaw LogoAfter spending years studying defamation laws and the many locations which provide instruction on how to slander without being exposed; we are at a new place.  A solution is being proposed which will insure would-be slanderers no longer need to rely on dissimilation if discovered.  This solution would completely relieve the slanderer of responsibility and the consequences of their actions.

Advocates against slander express concern over rumblings from sectors of the Media proposing slander laws should be eliminated.   These sectors are using the deaths in Paris to establish arguments for discarding these laws.

Why anyone would think having or not having slander laws would have prevented the Paris tragedy is beyond me?  The only thing I can see this would accomplish is to inflame people, perhaps move them to extreme action when they might otherwise have taken their grievances to court.   That is why there are laws, measures meant to prevent people from taking the law into their own hands.

Persons who slander and avow an affiliation with a religion which teaches from the Bible seem to have forgotten there is another set of laws.

The ones handed down by God.  I have found the Ten Commandments have a prevailing principle.  Thou shall not steal.  Do not steal what belongs to God.  Do not steal from your parents and neighbors what is theirs.   The Ninth Commandment is most specific:  Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

When you slander someone with intent you steal what is theirs; that theft is no lesser than if you broke in their home and took what does not belong to you.  Slander for gain is the same as if you took that stolen possession and sold it for your profit.   All the rhetoric in the world and titles; teacher; doctor; barber or journalist changes nothing, when you slander no matter living or dead you bear false witness.

If we would remember and abide by that Commandment there would be no need for slander laws.   However, until that day there is a need, if anything it grows greater as our Social Media and lack of control on it increases.  Until our information providers cease tilting the balanced credible in favor of the unethical and unreliable.

Slander like every other crime creates more than one victim and affects more than the intended target.  But unlike a theft where the property is recovered once slander is done, the target and those affected can never completely recover what was taken.

The comments and opinion expressed here are solely the writer’s and do not reflect the opinion of all the Members & Supporters of AdLLaw. 

Sharon Kendrick, AdLLaw Advocate – a.k.a. Dial Dancer

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Image

Have You Ever Thought?

1969369_561320017346743_8395647550719615687_n

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Renfield Has Nothing On Me

Renfield Has Nothing On Me

Renfield Has Nothing On Me PhotoHello, I am a grave robber.  I come from a long, proud and dishonorable line.  I am very proud of each of my ancestors.

The most renown was my uncle Renfield.  He was in the employ of Doctor Frankenstein, before he took his last position with a Count Dracula.

Unlike Uncle Renfield, I do not steal the bodies, to create monsters.  I steal a decedent’s legacy through vilification, using slander to get the same results.  But hold on, I am not common, like the gossips or rumor mill workers, although I will use their services later.

The old bones I dig up for my creations are verbal.  Sometimes I get a piece or a whole of it right.  But if I cannot I will take a verbal tibia, fibula or brain that belongs to someone else to construct falsehoods.  And when none of those work, I fashion the piece needed.  I am pleased to say I am very, very good at that kind of work; it is what I specialize in.

The   works suits me well since there no pesky laws to watch out for.   The best part is neither my employer nor the people who read my creations will care if I “fashioned” the story.   Truth be told some prefer it that way.

Just as with many of my ancestors, my name and work will live on long after the person or the truth has been forgotten.

I am a grave robber but unlike my ancestors, or their monster masters.  I am the monster and the master.

Have You Signed AdLLaw PetitionHello I am grave robber, I steal from the dead and Renfield has nothing on me.

Hello I am a defamer of the dead.  I steal from the dead and Renfield has nothing on me.

Hello I am Defamer the grave robber, I steal from the dead and Uncle Renfield has nothing on me.

Support the AdLLaw Initiative

AdLLaw Petition

AdLLaw Initiative Letter

Contact U.S. Senators

Contact U.S. President

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Now Enough Is Too Much: Defaming The Dead

Now Enough Is Too Much.jpg1Now Enough Is Too Much.jpg2Now Enough Is Too Much.jpg3Now Enough Is Too Much.jpg4

Sign the petition

http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/protect-the-legacy-of

Contact the US President and both US Senator for your State:  Tell them you support the AdLLaw Initiative and wish them to endorse it so it may become law.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/write-or-call

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

S. Kendrick, Cadeflaw/AdLLaw Resolution Specialist – a.k.a. Dial Dancer

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,