Did Paul Duffy's Wife Admit That He Was Engaged In Interstate Extortion On Facebook?

from the oops,-did-i-say-that? dept

Paul Duffy, as many of you know, is one of the key players in the Prenda/Anti-Piracy Law Group game. In fact, he's "officially" the only named partner of Prenda -- though others have argued that it's really John Steele and Paul Hansmeier pulling Duffy's strings. Either way, Duffy might want to have a talk with his wife. As some folks noticed, late on Monday, his wife, Shari Duffy made a post on Facebook (since deleted) about her husband's activities, in which she lashes out at those who have pointed out that he's engaged in what various courts have now called a "fraud on the court" by calling them "the worst kinds of thieves imaginable." But, the key thing is the final line of her comment:
If you can't read the full text, here it is:
Here's a fun fact...my husband sues people for pirating porn and the phone companies for putting it in the hands of people under 18...the men caught really hate his firm and have tried to harm him physically and financially, but they are the worst kind of thieves imaginable and shame on all the mobile carriers for allowing people to move X rated material to the hands of minors. Someone we know paid an undisclosed amount to settle a case so that we would not release his name to the public.
It's worth pointing out that the folks involved in various trolling efforts have generally bent over backwards to avoid saying that they're getting people to pay them to avoid being named, because, you know, that's illegal. As former federal prosecutor, Ken "Popehat" White notes, this "sounds like a confession of interstate extortion to me." And remember that Judge Wright, in the Southern District of California, has already claimed that Duffy's actions (along with Steele and Hansmeier) should be investigated by the US Attorneys for racketeering -- and extortion is generally a key part of many racketeering schemes.

I'm no expert on extortion law, so for those who are, please weigh in, but it seems like 18 USC 875(d) might be particularly relevant here:
Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, or corporation, any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to injure the property or reputation of the addressee or of another or the reputation of a deceased person or any threat to accuse the addressee or any other person of a crime, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
Admitting that the person paid up to avoid being named, and not because of any merit in the accusations seems to be a pretty clear admission to violating that law. We've heard of stupid criminals getting rung up for their own social networking posts, but how about their wives "bragging" about their actions and admitting to federal crimes in the process?

And, of course, not that it needs to be said, but while perhaps some of the people speaking out against Duffy and his firm were caught in his scheme to get people to pay up, many of us have never been involved or accused of infringement, and are speaking out because we think his actions are an abuse of the legal system to shake people down for money -- pretty much exactly as Shari perhaps inadvertently admitted.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    That One Guy (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 5:43am

    Umm, oops...

    Somehow I imagine dinner conversations between those two might be a little strained for the foreseeable future.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    icon
    Arsik Vek (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 5:47am

    Duffy's next comment: "I'm not sure who that woman is. She may or may not be my wife, but I have no direct knowledge of any relationship."

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    icon
    Atkray (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 6:40am

    With each new development the Prenda saga becomes more and more like a Scooby Doo episode.

    I fully expect that at the end this all, Steele will be screaming how he would have gotten away with it, if it hadn't been for those meddling kids.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    icon
    silverscarcat (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 6:59am

    Duffy should take Etna's advice...

    "Deny, deny, deny."

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    MrPendent, May 15th, 2013 @ 7:37am

    Maybe it's just me, but I really want to know what Julie Love does for a living.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 7:45am

    Hilariously, it looks like the same post has been deleted. Why so shy if you're so loud and proud, Shari?

    Copyright enforcement's best and brightest. The pride and joy of out_of_the_lube's heroic hall of fame. Bless their little pornographic, morally equestrian hearts.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 7:51am

    Re:

    Silly Atkray, if it was a Scooby Doo episode then Prenda would be running around dressed like a scary monster!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    icon
    Jessie (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 7:55am

    You can't produce a signed copy of the marriage license. Where is the proof, the evidence, that I am married to her?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 7:57am

    Another shithouse lawyer leaps to an absurd conclusion. Perhaps, the non-lawyer wife simply cites the motivation for the settlement, rather than the legitimacy? Stupid non-lawyers are prone to these sorts of mistakes all the time; right Chubby?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    icon
    David Muir (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 7:58am

    I notice one commenter is trying to be supportive. She says that to her "pornography is legalized prostitution". Wouldn't that make Duffy the pimp's thuggish enforcer?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    S. T. Stone, May 15th, 2013 @ 7:59am

    Re:

    ‘I don’t know whose signature that is on this marriage certificate.’

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    S. T. Stone, May 15th, 2013 @ 8:00am

    Re: Re:

    Well, they’re already lawyers. Ain’t that close enough?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 8:01am

    Re:

    John Steele just hates it when due process is enforced.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 8:01am

    Re:

    And you wonder why you're a punchline.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    icon
    Vidiot (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 8:03am

    Re:

    Ahh, but based on the IP address from which she accessed Facebook, he can find someone to sue. That is, of course, if the ISP will cough up her identity...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 8:04am

    Gee, what a surprise. Who would've thunk it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    icon
    DannyB (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 8:07am

    Re:

    Seems to me that Duffy's wife understood perfectly well what her husband is engaged in.

    > Stupid non-lawyers are prone to these sorts of mistakes all the time

    The stupid non-lawyer mistake she made, like others do all the time, was to brag about it to others (who can be questioned) and to brag about it in writing online (where it can never go away) and where Twitter's records can be subpoenaed in discovery in a federal criminal case.

    Yes, as you say, the non-lawyer wife simply cites the motivation for the settlement. But Duffy is involved in a scheme designed to force settlements for exactly that motive. It is known as: blackmail, extortion.

    So what is the absurd conclusion? Are you saying the obvious conclusion is absurd. The same conclusion everyone else, including federal judges reach?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 8:08am

    Re:

    Popehat>ac

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    icon
    DannyB (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 8:08am

    Re: Re:

    Not as much as out of the blue and his paymasters hate it.

    John may only get a criminal conviction.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    icon
    Vidiot (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 8:08am

    Re:

    A Scooby Doo episode in which Shaggy posts steamy torrents involving Daphne and Velma, in order to ensnare downloaders and extort money from them.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    Julian P., May 15th, 2013 @ 8:12am

    Re:

    I wouldn't exactly waive around the "you have an uninformed opinion" stick if I were you, AJ, as you lack expertise or even basic skills for technology, yet you feel without irony or shame you can write laws hobbling technology.

    Funny how it's the technology and economics people with actual expertise on how these things work who talk about how DRM doesn't work, file sharing can't be stopped, etc., yet it's lawyers without useful or relevant expertise who believe they have the judgment to discern correct policy.

    By an accident of birth, you live inside a technological society based on computers you did absolutely nothing to create or maintain, yet you speak against it out of the other side of your disgusting mouth, offensive to the people actually keeping your lifestyle comfortable.

    Bottom line: lawyers are as qualified to set technology policy as they are to set environmental policy.

    "Parasitism" isn't strong enough a word to describe your existence.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    icon
    TheLastCzarnian (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 8:14am

    Re:

    This is what I was thinking. This woman is trying to take the high road when her husband is actually getting money FOR THE PORNOGRAPHER. He is SUPPORTING pornography, not fighting it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    icon
    techflaws (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 8:18am

    Re:

    You mad, bro?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    Raul, May 15th, 2013 @ 8:29am

    Shari's subsequent comment that her husband "rarely ever loses cases" is funny seeing how he has never tried a porn infringement lawsuit so he has never won such a case. Nonetheless he DID have a pretty spectacular loss back on May 5 before Judge Wright in the CACD.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    out_of_the_blue, May 15th, 2013 @ 8:34am

    Mike admitz what we knowz: "I'm no expert on extortion law".

    Tort is a wrong. "Extortion" means "outside of being wronged". The premise of the threatened cases is that someone committed a wrong against the copyright holder, but could escape a trial by paying off. -- See how that goes? A party is wronged first giving them a "tort" at law, THEN the 2nd party may be forced to pay off, but can avoid it by out-of-court settlement. Happens many times every day.

    I'd say that your rabidly zealous ginning up this everyday sequence as if extortion is verging on defamation, and there's certainly a track record of posts here to substantiate an on-going campaign. -- Now you're attacking wives! Good move, "no expert".

    Just because Prenda is horrible doesn't mean that Mike is right on this or his other rants.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    icon
    Zakida Paul (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 8:37am

    "Worst kind of theft imaginable"?

    She really is stupid, isn't she?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 8:38am

    Re: Re:

    But but... they are keeping it away from the CHILDREN!

    Or well, actually, they seem to be blaming the ISPs for delivering their porn when the children access it.

    Never mind.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    icon
    Zakida Paul (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 8:41am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Maybe we should blame telephone companies for delivering phone sex too?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 8:44am

    Re: Mike admitz what we knowz: "I'm no expert on extortion law".

    I swear, I tried to parse that first paragraph of yours like 5 times, and I still don't know what the heck you are trying to say.

    I'm sorry, but I'm gonna have to throw a GrammarException at you.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30.  
    identicon
    PRMan, May 15th, 2013 @ 8:51am

    Re:

    Not "legalized prostitution" apparently. (And I agree with her assessment, BTW.)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 8:57am

    Somehow it wouldn't be totally outside the Prenda universe for Duffy to sue his own wife for defamation of character. That would be somewhat fun to watch and a fine addition to the clown act that they have performed so far.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  32.  
    icon
    fb39ca4 (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 9:00am

    I love how the last commenter is applauding Duffy for what he does, which is basically protecting the profits of porn companies.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  33.  
    identicon
    Nobody, May 15th, 2013 @ 9:06am

    Duffy will figure his way out of this. My guess is that he has already flown to Nevis with his wife to place her in a "purpose trust". The "purpose" is probably to raise his yet-to-be-born children. (relax, Duffy - this is sarcasm...)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  34.  
    icon
    Chronno S. Trigger (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 9:16am

    Re: Re:

    "And I agree with her assessment, BTW."

    I agree as well. Pornography is legalized prostitution. The only difference between me and her is I don't think prostitution should be illegal in the first place. Granted, I am assuming that Julie thinks both porn and prostitution should be illegal.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  35.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 9:17am

    Re:

    ...like a Scooby Doo episode.


    Ruh-roh!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  36.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 9:23am

    Why can't I find her facebook profile? :(

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  37.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 9:25am

    Re: Mike admitz what we knowz: "I'm no expert on extortion law".

    out of those "many times a day"..

    how many of those instances also included the threat of defamation?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  38.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 9:27am

    Re:

    That is quite a confession. I respect lesbians, so godspeed! ;)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  39.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 9:28am

    Maybe she just wanted to get rid of her husband for a couple years while he's locked away for extortion?

    Maybe he didn't get her a good enough Mother's Day gift? Forgot her bday? Hell hath no fury...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  40.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 9:28am

    Re: Re: Mike admitz what we knowz: "I'm no expert on extortion law".

    Program has unexpectedly quit because of the following error:

    Fatal Error: Uncaught GrammarException

    Would you like to send a report?

    [Yes] [No] [Ignore and Reopen]

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  41.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 9:34am

    Re: Re:

    Salt Marsh, I think.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  42.  
    icon
    crade (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 9:38am

    Re: Re:

    Nah, he would only be supporting the porn companies if he were in any way legimate..
    Since he is a fraud, isn't actually representing the copyright owners and is just pocketing the extortion money, he's totally in the clear :)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  43.  
    icon
    crade (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 9:54am

    Re:

    Ok, so I get that she buys into the copyright is theft propaganda, so then the worst kind of theives imaginable are those who...
    steal from the porn companies?

    I mean porn is great and all, but I'd hardly rate it as the most noble cause imaginable.. What about people who steal organs from hospitals or something?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  44.  
    icon
    Spaceboy (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 10:13am

    So she has direct knowledge of someone engaging in transmitting pornagraphy to minors and she is withholding that information because they were paid off?

    She is worse than the the people they are extorting.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  45.  
    icon
    Trails (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 10:18am

    Re: Mike admitz what we knowz: "I'm no expert on extortion law".

    Tort is a wrong. "Extortion" means "outside of being wronged". The premise of the threatened cases is that someone committed a wrong against the copyright holder, but could escape a trial by paying off. -- See how that goes? A party is wronged first giving them a "tort" at law, THEN the 2nd party may be forced to pay off, but can avoid it by out-of-court settlement. Happens many times every day.


    Hi, no.

    So, grade 4 latin. "Ex" = "out" or "out of", "tort" is actually rooted in "torquere" meaning "to twist", so "out of twisting" or "extract by twisting" is about what "ex tort" in Latin translates to.

    Further, while the word is rooted in Latin, and we don't actually use Latin, so grade 4 transliteration into a dead language isn't the pithy or biting argument you seem to believe, and probably doesn't carry much legal weight either.

    But other than the incorrect translation which is meaningless anyways, that was a great argument.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  46.  
    icon
    Trails (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 10:20am

    Re:

    Like this one time, a guy stole my kidney, but thank god he didn't infringe any porn copyrights. Hell, I have a whole other kidney.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  47.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 10:20am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Granted, I am assuming that Julie thinks both porn and prostitution should be illegal.

    Assumptions can be funny... my read of her post was that she might be looking for work. I mean after all the context was Duffy helping the legalized pimps.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  48.  
    icon
    tqk (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 10:30am

    Re: Mike admitz what we knowz: "I'm no expert on extortion law".

    Tort is a wrong. "Extortion" means "outside of being wronged".

    Interesting theory, but perhaps you should learn to use a dictionary prior to pontificating. "Extort" is from the Latin "extortus", meaning to "obtain by coercion or intimidation." "Tort" is also from Latin, but from "tortum" or "tortus", meaning "Any civil wrong or injury; a wrongful act (not involving a breach of contract) for which an action will lie; a form of action, in some parts of the United States, for a wrong or injury." It appears the two words are only somewhat related homonyms (however, I'm no expert on dead languages).

    On a more relevant note, have you yet nailed down the date and time when Mike peed in your cornflakes? I ask because I can't think of any other reason why you'd continue to force yourself read his stuff. You don't appear to gain any pleasure or knowledge from the experience.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  49.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 11:03am

    Mystery Solved!

    Salt Marsh is really Old Man Smithers!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  50.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 11:13am

    Re:

    Gotta be getting crowded under that bus...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  51.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 15th, 2013 @ 11:16am

    Re: Re:

    You haven't seen Duffy's wife in the flesh..she may not NEED to dress as a scary monster.....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  52.  
    icon
    hmm (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 11:22am

    Duffy: My 'wife' (of whom I have absolutely no knowledge) posted that comment without my permission so I sent her a DMCA notice asking her to take it down (even though I don't know who she is).

    I have sent letters to her family stating unless they give me $1500 I will release her most intimate secrets to all the neighbours.

    I have her address (It's the same as mine) and I consider this 100% proof that she's guilty of SOMETHING.....

    I have to go now, because I have a meeting at my child's school (I will be there purely to represent my child but I have no financial interest in it) because they want to ask me why someone called 'Alan Cooper' has signed a permission slip.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  53.  
    icon
    Mike Brown (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 1:25pm

    Re:

    Actually, I have to agree with her on that point. Downloaders ARE the worst kind of thieves imaginable: they download all day and all night, and despite all of their efforts, not one single title has ever gone missing.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  54.  
    identicon
    Jay, May 15th, 2013 @ 1:56pm

    If he tries to deny it was his wife that posted the comment, that the account was hacked, or something like that, then the prosecutors can simply use the same methodology that Prenda Law has used to determine who has downloaded porn to correctly identify the individual that posted the message. Prenda law has never done anything illegal or unethical in their investigations and determinations of who was downloading copyrighted materials. They have always come to the court 100% confident that the methods used by them has led them to the person who was at the computer at the time the download occurred. Otherwise, threatening to take someone to court that you didn't think was guilty, to ruin their reputation and financially cripple, unless they paid you $2000 would have to be criminal.

    Duffy, and the others should have no objections at all, in having the same standard applied to them, that they have confidently applied to others.

    On the other hand, because this has become, as one poster mentioned, "a performance art piece", and it appears that Duffy looks like he is getting tossed under the bus, maybe someone else with the firm, had the Facebook account hacked, to create some evidence to support the theory that Duffy was the rogue mastermind behind everything.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  55.  
    identicon
    md2000, May 15th, 2013 @ 2:08pm

    Re: Re: Mike admitz what we knowz: "I'm no expert on extortion law".

    This lawsuit is dead.

    It has rung down the curtain, and joined the choir invisible. It is no longer.

    It is an ex-tort!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  56.  
    icon
    JMT (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 5:11pm

    Re: Mike admitz what we knowz: "I'm no expert on extortion law".

    "Just because Prenda is horrible doesn't mean that Mike is right on this or his other rants."

    There is nothing funnier than watching someone, you in particular, trying and failing to burn someone with completely incorrect info.

    I wonder what your definition of schadenfreude is?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  57.  
    icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), May 15th, 2013 @ 8:18pm

    As I have said a couple times in other places, I sure hope she signed some paperwork for him.
    It would be nice to see her caught up in all of this and have to face the brutal reality of what her husband and his buddies have been up to, and experience more suffering than her tweet about having misplaced her cars high end tire iron.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  58.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 16th, 2013 @ 2:06am

    I like that her friend who doesn't endorse porn and considers it prostitution then turns around to applaud Duffy for protecting and helping gain profits for those who produce it.

    It wouldnt make sense if any of the family or friends of team prenda weren't also completely nonsensical, after all

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  59.  
    identicon
    DCX2, May 16th, 2013 @ 3:47pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    She already did.

    shame on all the mobile carriers for allowing people to move X rated material to the hands of minors

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  60.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 17th, 2013 @ 12:45pm

    Re: Re: Mike admitz what we knowz: "I'm no expert on extortion law".

    What did you expect? He tried to use his brian to formulate that comment but got hit with a NullPointerException.

    He did the best he could with what he's got. It's not right to make fun of the mentally handicapped.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  61.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 19th, 2013 @ 2:59am

    You don't understand... It's Shari's subtle and elegant revenge for her husband's attempt to take away their two daughters AND make Shari pay child support (2 years ago).

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  62.  
    identicon
    Lord Binky, May 20th, 2013 @ 6:48am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    The mental flexibility required to twist extorting people for associating their name with porn into preventing minors from accessing porn is really quite impressive.

    Especially impressive when you consider that at the same time that she is blindly ignoring the minors she considers as being protected are generally more skilled at aquiring porn than the adults they extorting.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  63.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, May 21st, 2013 @ 10:21am

    Re:

    LOLZ, the attorney signed on for Duffy is Steele. Coinky-dinky?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  64.  
    identicon
    Nora, May 21st, 2013 @ 11:58pm

    So you are speaking out on behalf of those who enjoy stealing porn because you are ... um ... A proper thief? A proud masturbator? Fucking pitiful loser douchebag. Sorry Popehat got fired as a prosecutor. He was probably beating off to stolen porn as he let baby molestors walk so he could watch the babies on video under his cubicle.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  65.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 8th, 2013 @ 8:32pm

    Re:

    John Steele just hates it when due process is enforced. How d'you like getting dinged by judges, jackass? Maybe your dog Nazaire can suck you off and make your booboo all better.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This