Free speech law means that he has to prove the alleged libel is untrue. Good luck with that!
He was the youngest prosecutor in Norwalk, Conn. He worked for the NFL and was an analyst on Court TV. But if you Google Matt Couloute, the first thing that comes up is: Liarscheatersrus.com, a site that warns women web-surfers about men who lie and cheat in their personal relationships.
“It’s unfortunate,” said Couloute, as he walked in front of the Federal Courthouse in downtown Manhattan. “Anyone can go online and do that to somebody.”
But in Matt’s case, his “slanderer” isn’t so anonymous. In fact, Amanda Ryncarz, Matt’s former girlfriend, fully admits posting on the site about their three-year relationship. "I posted on liarscheatersrus.com,” she said in a written statement, “because I wanted to warn other women in order to protect them from what I suffered.”
Couloute is now suing Ryncarz for “tortious interference with prospective business relations. It’s a case that could determine what people are and are not allowed to post on the Web.
What Ryncarz allegedly “suffered” is fully available to anyone who googles Couloute. It includes her detailed descriptions of Couloute’s broken promises and what she describes as a pattern of deceit.
Couloute says he can’t get away from the posts, which he says have ruined his life. He claims he’s lost clients, and it even got in the way of buying his dream home.
Source
8 comments:
America deffenetly has too many lawyers we need lawyer control laws
I thought that one was innocent until proven guilty, so it is the accuser who ought to be able to prove guilt in a libel or slander case and not the accused to prove innocence!
http://liarscheatersrus.com doesn't seem to exist anymore.
Anon 3:32 - Actually, no. Since it's the man who had his name posted on the website that is filing the case, the burden is his to prove he's in the right.
This protects the folks who write/speak about things they know to be true, but cannot specifically prove.
DALE R. PATTERSON - I just followed your link, and there it WAS. It still exits...
I think it just gets overloaded with all the publicity it gets.
Truth is always a defense in the US against libel and slander. Not always so in other countries.
But in the US and most western countries you have to prove something is the truth beyond all reasonable doubt and that may depend on being able to afford competent lawyers, and getting a favorable jury, etc., etc.
He kind of reminds mr of LEX LUTHOR
Why does Google allow this manipulation of their search engine? They are allowing a single site to claim the top spot on their searches?
Post a Comment