RSS

Category Archives: Cadeflaw Articles

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: , , , , ,

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: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Who said the Dead can’t be sued for Defaming the Living?

Here Lies A Decedent

Since the start of this organization and throughout its evolution it has been visited by persons who said they had legal knowledge and had come to set the record straight.   They argued there is no need for a law against defaming the deceased.   Going on to explain such a law would give way to frivolous law suits, violate our First Amendment Rights, hamper writers and the dead did not need to worry about their reputations.  It was further pointed out the possibility of a deceased person being sued for an act of slander committed while they were alive was highly unlikely.  

A listener on one of our CadeFlaw radio shows said the probability of a law suit against a decedent for slander happening had about the same chance as an average person affording the Hope Diamond.

Well, the Hope Diamond has just become very affordable.

Well, the Hope Diamond has just become very affordable.

Well, the Hope Diamond has just become very affordable.

Jesse Ventura file a law suit for defamation against the Estate of Chris Kyle author of American Sniper and won.

In January 2012, former Navy Seal Chris Kyle was on the Opie and Anthony and Bill O’Reilly shows promoting his autobiography titled “American Sniper”.  During the interviews Chris Kyle said in 2006 while in a bar that was holding a wake for a slain Navy Seal he punched a man he dubbed Scruff Face, because of derogatory remarks made about Seals who had lost their lives in Iraq.  Later he would identify the person called Scruff Face as former Minnesota Governor and former Navy Underwater Demolition Team member Jesse Ventura.

Jesse Ventura publicly stated he had never met Chris Kyle, was not in the bar when the punch took place and did not disrespect dead Navy Seals.

In 2012 Jesse Ventura filed a petition for a defamation suit which was approved with a court date of June 2013.

“On Saturday, February 2, 2013, Chris Kyle and Chad Littlefield were shot and killed at the Rough Creek Ranch-Lodge-Resort shooting range by veteran Marine Eddie Ray Routh.”

It is reported Jesse Ventura requested the book’s publishing company, and Chris Kyle’s Widow and Estate Executor remove his name from the book and any possible movie.   They stood by Kyle’s claims of accuracy in the book and denied Ventura’s request.   Jesse Ventua petitioned the Courts to move the suit from Chris Kyle to his Estate. The request was granted.

“On July 29, 2014 Jesse Ventura was awarded $1.8 million in the defamation suit against the estate of Chris Kyle”

Dead Can NOT Sue For Slander

The possibility of a deceased person being sued for defamation is a reality.

 But the ability for a family to sue the slanderer of their deceased loved one is an impossibility. 

Because there is no law against defaming the dead.  There is no legal way to hold a slanderer accountable by the Family or Estate of a defamed decedent. 

Let’s change this.

 Sign the Petition:    http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/protect-the-legacy-of.fb51?source=s.fb&r_by=8406728

Contact your U.S. Senator and have them endorse it:    http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Contact the President and ask him to endorse it:    http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/write-or-call#write

Contact family, friends & associates and ask them to do the same.

10599881_519033774908701_431143186_o

There are many gaps and omissions in the articles available for research.  Few articles hold an unbiased stance on this situation.  Nowhere did I find an accurate chronicle of events.  I will leave further reading and discussion of the rights or wrongs of either party to you readers.

References:

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-07-30/jesse-ventura-wins-his-not-so-dumb-defamation-suit-against-dead-hero

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/02/naval-seal-author-chris-kyle-lies-then-dies-what-next-for-jesse-ventura-2554836.html

http://www.tpnn.com/2014/07/30/the-reaction-to-jesse-venturas-victory-in-his-lawsuit-against-chris-kyles-widow-aint-pretty/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/jesse-ventura-wins-1-8m-in-american-sniper-defamation-case/

S. Kendrick – a.k.a. Dial Dancer

 

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

How To Defame Without Speaking Or Writing One Word

Defamation by photograph alteration:  

This is nothing new and has been performed since the 1800’s.    It was a main staple for increasing circulation by what was called England’s Sensational Novel and News Press.   Defamation by photo alteration or Photoshop has been done to many people alive and deceased.   Some people were well known some not, some alterations were executed in fun, but others were not.   Many people among both groups were victimized due to the use of an altered photo.   CadeFlaw/AdLLaw has brought many examples of ways the deceased is defamed, but this is one which recently came to mind.

Picture2

From the copious number of Media produced photos of Michael Jackson an abundance of them may not be genuine stills or accurately depict what was taking place.  MJ, other people, locations and items were added or removed.  People and items were re positioned or shot from unfavorable angles to distort.  In one reported case the “Tabloids used a Michael Jackson impersonator” and in another a “cardboard cutout was used.” to create their much desired derisive photo.

What the average person now does with a camera and their Photoshop software the Tabloids, so called credible Media, Paparazzi and professional photographers have accomplished for decades.

An excellent example of defamation by photo alteration is the photo of MJ and Gavin.  For years when necessary MJ Fans displayed the photo with Gavin’s face blurred, thinking it was the less offensive of the two, but that photo was altered to give MJ a sinister look and the two an air of intimacy. The Media displayed the blurred face photo on TV; News and Celebrity Gossip sites and in magazines.  They cited the blurring was to protect Gavin’s identity while releasing his name and photos of his unprotected face in other reports.

HTDWUW PhotoCompare the two photos see how Michael Jackson’s mouth is curiously reshaped; there was a shading and heaviness applied to his brows; all which was meant to provoke suspicion and accelerate the building of injurious judgments about MJ.   Look at the photo minus Gavin’s face blurred and you see the posture of the two says they were posed rather than natural or intimate. 

This altering of photos is a psychological game played on us; a game which causes us to view and judge a person or situation without proper context.  Put the blurred picture with any article or posted alone and it speaks, but the words are false.  This is how the Media and persons on Social Media defame without speaking or writing one word.

Picture3

Sources:

1.    In the less than discerning book called “Tabloid Baby”.  The author writes of his accounts as a one of the more infamous Tabloid Journalists before he decided to quit the business.  The book is written on a style of “those were the good ole days”.   In the book the author reminisces about when the Tabloids used a Michael Jackson impersonator for a particularly nasty story.

2.  “Media’s deadly criminal tactics in pursuing and creating a story”

3.    Carnival Cutout Photo

4.   Media used photoshopped picture of alleged gunman

5.   Never Happened photo

6.   Fake story of a split as Angelina is coming to terms with possible breast cancer.  http://www.celebdirtylaundry.com/wp-content/uploads/Brad_pitt_angelina_jolie-split.jpg

S. Kendrick, Resolution Specialist, a.k.a. Dial Dancer

AdLLaw Advocate, July 20, 2014

 
8 Comments

Posted by on July 20, 2014 in Advocacy, Cadeflaw Articles

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Cadeflaw: We Have to Put Our Hearts on the Line

As I recall the Cadeflaw interview on blogtalkradio(http://www.blogtalkradio.com/a-place-in-your-heart)hosted by Rev. Catherine Gross a few weeks ago, I remember that just before the actual interview started, Rev. Gross played Michael Jackson’s song “On the Line.” She stated that she felt the song was appropriate for the occasion and fit the work that Cadeflaw was doing. I had never considered our mission in those terms; however, opportunity has permitted me to go back and really listen to the words of the song, and in doing so I have received an even greater revelation in the pursuit of an anti-defamation legacy law.

By MJ Brookins   Thu, Sep 01, 2011

We believe it’s morally wrong to defame the character of any deceased person.

http://mjtpmagazine.presspublisher.us/issue/time-after-time/article/cadeflaw-we-have-to-put-our-hearts-on-the-line

Time After TimeCADEFLAW

 
1 Comment

Posted by on September 25, 2011 in Cadeflaw Articles

 

Understanding Defamation

Originally, there was no need to enact a civil law remedy for defamation of the deceased, because there were criminal libel statutes. These were designed to maintain the public peace when one person spoke ill of a dead person, and violence was feared by the government authorities. Over the centuries, the threat to public peace diminished, yet defamatory speech levied against dead persons has not.

By Julie Noel   Mon, Aug 01, 2011

http://mjtpmagazine.presspublisher.us/issue/star-dancer/article/understanding-defamation

Star DancerCADEFLAW

 

 

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on September 25, 2011 in Cadeflaw Articles

 

Michael Jackson Fans Want Anti-Defamation Law For Deceased

A group of Michael Jackson fans have created the California Anti-Defamation Law petition in hopes of getting a law passed that would make it illegal to slander the dead.

Mary Brookins, 57, and half-a-dozen other Jackson supporters who met in an online Jackson fan group, is upset by the negative coverage the “Thriller” singer has received since his passing.

https://i2.wp.com/a323.yahoofs.com/ymg/thatsreallyweek__5/thatsreallyweek-904876212-1269738055.jpgThe group is angered by articles that referrer to Jackson as “Wacko Jacko,” suggest he was the victim of a self-inflicted drug overdose, or is guilty of child molestation charges for which he was tried and found not guilty in 2005.

http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/hiphopmediatraining/364977/michael-jackson-fans-want-anti-defamation-law-for-deceased/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on September 25, 2011 in Cadeflaw Articles

 

Tags: , , , , ,