Confirmed Horrible Person James Woods Continues Being Horrible In 'Winning' Awful Lawsuit To Unmask Deceased Online Critic

from the to-the-bowels-of-hell dept

So... Hollywood actor James Woods continues to make it clear that he's a complete and total asshole. As you may or may not recall, last year, Woods sued an anonymous Twitter user who went by the name Abe List, for mocking Woods on twitter. Specifically, List called Woods "clownboy" and later tweeted: "cocaine addict James Woods still sniffing and spouting." Woods sued Abe List claiming that the "cocaine addict" statement was defamatory, and (the important part) demanding the name and identity of Abe List. The fact that Woods, himself, has a long (long, long, long) history of spouting off similarly incendiary claims to people on Twitter apparently wasn't important. Here is an example of a Woods tweet that seems quite similar to the one he, himself, claimed was defamatory:
Ken "Popehat" White agreed to defend Abe List, along with lawyer Lisa Bloom. And while the judge initially (and, in our opinion, correctly) found Woods' lawsuit to be nothing more than a SLAPP suit, the judge eventually changed his mind. The case was moving along... and then something bizarre happened. Abe List (whoever that is) died (unexpectedly, apparently). Woods then took to Twitter to obnoxiously gloat about "winning" the case, leaving out the fact that the case was ending due to the death of the defendant. After people pointed out to Woods how ridiculous it was that he was gloating over a "victory" when someone had died, the ever classy Woods, gloated some more, first saying he hoped that List died "screaming my name. in agony" and then later saying: "Learn this. Libel me, I'll sue you. If you die, I'll follow you to the bowels of Hell. Get it?"

Woods later deleted those tweets, but as I said at the time, the whole thing is sickening. Even if Abe List was trolling Woods, happily celebrating someone's death because they once made fun of you on Twitter seems to suggest you deserve to be made fun of on Twitter. Constantly.

To then add insult to death, Woods and his lawyers continued to push forward with the lawsuit, demanding to still uncover the name of Abe List. Woods' lawyers basically tried to argue that because they didn't know Abe List's identity, it was possible that Ken White was lying that List had died. They argued that they needed White to disclose Abe List's real name to prove that List was really dead:
Critically, although White claims that AL is deceased, he has refused to provide any evidence whatsoever substantiating this claim. Moreover, when Woods' counsel reasonably requested that White at least provide the identity of his now-purportedly-deceased client -- a fact which would be necessary in order to confirm AL is actually deceased -- White refused.
Emphasis in the original. And, of course White refused. The whole point of the lawsuit appeared to be to reveal Abe List's real identity, which he has every right to protect under the First Amendment. White was hired to protect that identity, so for Woods' lawyer to pretend that it's so horrific that White would refuse to reveal the name is ridiculous -- but apparently par for the course for Woods and his "to the bowels of hell" ethos. Even more ridiculous, Woods and his lawyers demanded White be sanctioned for refusing to give up the name.

White responded by highlighting how ridiculous all this is, and how it's pretty clear that Woods is just looking to harass and intimidate his critics. In his reply, White even included screenshots of the Tweets above, showing how Woods is gloating about all of this.
When defendant (Abe Doe)... died and his personal representative dismissed his appeal of this Court's denial of his anti-SLAPP motion, Plaintiff James Woods gloated and celebrated his death, expressing his hope that Mr. Doe died "screaming [Woods' name."

Now, Mr. Woods seeks to compel Mr. Doe's attorney, non-party Kenneth P. White ("Mr. White"), to disclose Mr. Doe's identity, and to sanction Mr. White almost $10,000 for asserting the attorney-client privilege in response to his questions.... Mr. Woods asserts that his purpose is legitimate and that he does not seek to harass or abuse Mr. Doe's survivors. But Mr. Woods' own public statements give the lie to that assertion. Mr. Woods wants to do just what he said he wants to do: publicly harass and vilify a dead man and his family.

The Motion is meritless, and is a transparent attempt to abuse the discovery process to exact twisted revenge by harassing Mr. Doe's family. First, contrary to Mr. Woods' arguments, Mr. White expressly premised his refusals to answer questions on one ground -- the attorney-client privilege. That assertion was correct. Because the entire purpose of Mr. White's representation of Mr. Doe was to protect Mr. Doe's identity, and because Mr. White only learned Mr. Doe's identity through confidential communications, Mr. Woods cannot force Mr. White to disclose it.
Unfortunately (and... ridiculously), the court has now ruled that White needs to turn over List's real name (along with the details of where he died and the name of his heirs) within 10 days. The court rejected the request for sanctions against White, and also some other information that White insisted was also protected information (such as whether or not List had other Twitter accounts as well).

This is unfortunate, and a travesty. In response, White provided the following statement:
Sometimes in litigation the bad guys win. This was such a day. I remain very proud to have fought for Abe Doe, and proud to have opposed this vexatious case by James Woods, a petulant bully whose Twitter conduct shows he can dish it out but can’t take it. I’m pleased that the court rejected his demand to compel me to answer several other questions, and that it also rejected his frivolous demand for sanctions.
Woods' lawyer, Michael Weinsten, on the other hand, made the following absolutely ridiculous statement:
This is a significant step forward in our ability to recover the millions in damages caused by John Doe's cowardly Tweet. It also sends a message to others who believe they can hide behind the anonymity of online social media to falsely accuse public figures of heinous behavior without recourse to themselves.
First of all, the idea that List's tweet caused "millions in damages" is so laughable as to make you wonder if Weinsten is also on drugs (note: that's a joke and rhetorical hyperbole...). First off, List's original tweet was a reply to someone else's tweet, meaning that only very, very, very few people saw it, because only those who followed both Abe and Woods would have seen it. Second, it would suggest that such a tweet actually hurt Woods' reputation. And I'd posit that it seems a hell of a lot more likely that Woods' own actions, such as gloating over List's death, did significantly more to harm his own reputation than any silly hyperbolic tweet from an anonymous Twitter user. Finally, List didn't "accuse" Woods of "heinous behavior." He did what people -- including Woods -- regularly do on Twitter, which is make fun of other people. To argue that Woods needs special protection from a Twitter troll makes you wonder what kind of special snowflake Woods thinks he is, that no one should ever be able to mock him on Twitter, while he is apparently free to mock anyone he likes.

And, of course, on Tuesday evening, Woods took to Twitter once again to gloat over the fact that he, that special snowflake whose itty bitty feelings were hurt by someone mocking him on Twitter, is able to stomp on the grave of a dead man. He tweeted a bunch of headlines, declaring "victory" despite the fact his victory spits on the First Amendment, and then made this idiotic analogy:
Huh? I recognize that he's trying to argue that you go after "the big dog" so that others won't pester you, or whatever, but he literally went after a no name internet troll -- for doing nearly identical things to things that Woods himself had done. He also tries to defend the "damages" claim by saying that to be a "lead" in a film you have to be insured, and claims of being a drug addict can make you uninsurable. And, sure... but what fucking insurance company uses anonymous trolls tweeting obvious jokes on Twitter to determine if lead actors are drug addicts? The answer? NONE. Woods is full of shit (again: rhetorical hyperbole, James).

This case is an unfortunate travesty of justice. List was, undoubtedly, something of an internet troll himself, regularly pushing many people's buttons (in fact, when List died, White posted about how List regularly attacked White's political beliefs as well). But I don't care how annoyed a troll might make you feel, or how hurt your special feelings are, someone like Woods (who regularly mocks people he calls "snowflakes" online -- a term often used to mock those who can't take any criticism) shouldn't get to stomp all over the grave of someone just because they made him feel bad.



Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 4 Jan 2017 @ 8:42am

    I wonder if Popehat would like to take the case of every person Woods has tweeted insults similar to the one at the base of this case. One would enjoy seeing him bleeding millions of dollars when people merely have to claim to be inconvenienced by what Woods said while offering no proof of the same.

    Perhaps the fact no one will insure him has less to do with Abes tweets, and more so with Mr. Woods unhinged ranting at anyone that upsets him online. That perhaps a 'star' given to suggesting random people are drug abusers and other insults doesn't track very well for a big budget film.

    So I hope he gets sued by someone he insulted, and they point to this case as why they are entitled to keep mocking him online & demand full access to the details of his life.

    As I learned on the interwebs....
    Christ what an asshole.

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

    • icon
      crade (profile), 4 Jan 2017 @ 8:59am

      Re:

      James Woods' comments sound like the comments of someone addicted to cocaine. I mean, I'm not saying he is a coke addict or anything... it's probably hypothetically possible he isn't addicted to cocaine, but I just personally see it as a pretty hard sell based on his twitter usage. I don't remember having heard anyone who wasn't a coke addict talk that way before... Anyway I wouldn't advocate insuring him, that's for sure. :)

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

      • identicon
        I.T. Guy, 4 Jan 2017 @ 9:10am

        Re: Re:

        "Attack the big rat with a jackhammer"
        Sound to me like a meth head that has been on a binge for 72 hours.

        Fitting he associates himself as a "Big Rat."

        James woods walks by a mirror... antagonizes self.

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

  • icon
    Nate (profile), 4 Jan 2017 @ 8:46am

    "If you die, I'll follow you to the bowels of Hell"

    I have no interest in visiting your neighborhood, James.

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

  • icon
    kenichi tanaka (profile), 4 Jan 2017 @ 8:48am

    Abe List's estate should sue James Woods for claiming that Abe List died screaming his name, THAT could be construed as defamatory since it never happened. LOLS.

    Wouldn't that be a SLAPP in the face.

    Oh, and someone should remind James Woods of the Streisand Effect. Oh, I did, when I tweeted it to him. LOLS

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

  • identicon
    kallethen, 4 Jan 2017 @ 8:55am

    (in fact, when List died, White posted about how List regularly attacked White's political beliefs as well)

    And yet White still worked to defend him. I gotta applaud him for not having thin skin and also showing us that some lawyers are actually good people.

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

  • identicon
    Abe List, 4 Jan 2017 @ 9:03am

    He is just mad he is impotent from all the blow he does.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jan 2017 @ 9:04am

    i'm lost, does woods smoke crack or snort cocaine?

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

  • identicon
    I.T. Guy, 4 Jan 2017 @ 9:18am

    Oh nooooooos. Will iCarly be able to fill the role of Security Guard #2 ever again. The humanity!!!

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jan 2017 @ 9:38am

    woods is sick. hollywoods is sick.

    end of that story.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jan 2017 @ 9:43am

    "Attack the big rat wit ha jackhammer, and pick off all the little rats as they desert the sinking ship"

    ... and then completely ignore the fact that you sunk your own ship to spite a couple rats

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jan 2017 @ 9:49am

    I see Family Guy's depiction of him is true to life. And people say cartoons aren't real.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jan 2017 @ 9:58am

    Seems like the easy solution would be for woods to post a substantial bond in escrow to be forfeited to the heirs if he contacts them for any reason. An equal amount to what he claimed in damages seems fair.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jan 2017 @ 10:03am

    In other news, after having successfully stomped a dead person, James Woods announces intent to run for president after Donald Drumpf.

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

  • icon
    Roger Strong (profile), 4 Jan 2017 @ 10:04am

    Woods' lawyer, Michael Weinsten, on the other hand, made the following absolutely ridiculous statement...

    Clearly Mr. Weinsten is operating on the theory that when you're up to your nose in shit the only way out is to take a deep breath and dive.

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

  • identicon
    Mononymous Tim, 4 Jan 2017 @ 10:05am

    Come back 2016, you missed someone.

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

  • icon
    madasahatter (profile), 4 Jan 2017 @ 11:11am

    Woods meet Streisand

    What is interesting is most Twitter storms rarely get beyond the participants. The rest of the world is blissful unaware of the storm unless someone brings it to their attention. Its not that they are unaware of Twitter storms but find them a rather pointless exercise in immaturity.

    Woods should learn Babs that stirring up nest is a good way for others to find out that you are a certified turd.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jan 2017 @ 11:36am

    I used to like James Woods in particular is voice acting as Hades in Disney's Hercules (ironic casting in light of this) but I now genuinely hate the guy.

    It's already bad enough to go after some no-name Twitter troll because made you feel bad then do the equivalent of "grave dancing" by celebrating their death and calling it a victory, THEN PUSHING FORWARD WITH THE LAWSUIT WHEN THE PERSON CANNOT DEFEND THEMSELVES JUST TO MAKE AN EXAMPLE OF THEM.

    I hate you James Woods.

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

    • icon
      Ninja (profile), 4 Jan 2017 @ 11:48am

      Re:

      Ah, so Mr Woods is a Satan worshiper that smokes crack and eats little kids for breakfast. Ahem. I wonder if a lawsuit is coming :-D

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

    • icon
      orbitalinsertion (profile), 4 Jan 2017 @ 2:26pm

      Re:

      Ha. For all the things to come crawling out of Woods' work, I'll always remember him as the over-the-edge, morally flexible agent of some morally flexible TLA, Mike Toreno in GTA: San Andreas.

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

    • icon
      PaulT (profile), 5 Jan 2017 @ 12:33am

      Re:

      My personal favourite Woods role is Max Renn in Videodrome, playing a despicable executive for a small cable TV station. Charged with tracking down the most extreme content to show, he becomes obsessed with the titular broadcast, and eventually enters into a realm where it's impossible to separate it from reality.

      A fantastic film, it's only recently that I wondered if Woods wasn't really acting.

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

  • icon
    Ninja (profile), 4 Jan 2017 @ 11:38am

    "This is a significant step forward in our ability to recover the millions in damages "

    I think he is mistaking copyright with libel. As far as I know only copyright works forever.

    It is worrying to see the judge went as far as to make them spew his/her heirs identity. This is one of those cases that should get crowdfunding to go for appeals. It's complete insanity.

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

  • identicon
    Digitari, 4 Jan 2017 @ 12:00pm

    Addiction

    James woods IS a cocaine addict and will be for the rest of his life, this is a fact! You cannot "cure" an addiction, you can only modify your behavior to not use.
    One can also be a "dry" addict, not using but still craving the addiction.However the "dry addicts usually have behavioral problems like anger issues... oh wait.........

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

  • identicon
    kallethen, 4 Jan 2017 @ 12:03pm

    Oh, side note to point out even more how much of an ass James Woods is:

    Not only did he verbally dance on Abe's grave on Twitter, he went further and bashed Lisa Bloom for announcing her client's death on Twitter (when she only posted it in response to his post about "winning").

    (was mentioned in a linked article on today's article, but I thought it bears repeating)

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jan 2017 @ 1:26pm

    Time to set up some anon accounts and harass the hell out of the POS James Woods.

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

  • icon
    killthelawyers (profile), 4 Jan 2017 @ 1:38pm

    I wonder why the judge did not just request that Mr. White submit the information for an in camera inspection (giving it to the judge for the judge alone to review). If the court had not yet ruled on whether to require revealing the Plaintiff's identity, it seems inappropriate to do so on the premise that the case is now mooted.

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

    • icon
      JoeCool (profile), 4 Jan 2017 @ 8:27pm

      Re:

      It's the difference between a criminal case and a civil case. In a criminal case, if the defendant dies, it's an automatic acquittal. In a civil case, if the defendant dies, the estate is automatically substituted for the defendant and the case continues.

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

  • icon
    Zinc Whiskers (profile), 4 Jan 2017 @ 1:39pm

    Didn't this guy nail a dead cat to some girl's door?

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jan 2017 @ 2:13pm

    2016 missed a good chance with not knocking off mr woods.

    Here's hoping 2017 picks up the slack

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

  • icon
    wshuff (profile), 4 Jan 2017 @ 2:15pm

    There are plenty of drug-addled actors who find work (see, e.g., #winning) because they still have talent or a following of loyal fans. If James Woods doesn't get work it's because, well . . . Who wants to watch anything starring James Woods? The answer . . . People who get their cinema fix in the bargain bin DVDs at the gas station.

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

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 4 Jan 2017 @ 4:43pm

    Nice headstart

    I see that Woods is determined to score the prestigious 'Biggest Asshole and/or Loser of 2017' award, and is starting strong by continuing to dance on the grave of someone who said mean things about him, and being a gigantic freakin' hypocrite in the process.

    I'm sure he'll have significant competition for the #1 spot, but with a move like this I'd say he's taken an early and commanding lead, now he just needs to continue to be his asshole self and the award could very well be his come the end of the year.

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

  • identicon
    My_Name_Here, 4 Jan 2017 @ 8:04pm

    THe court got it right, it's gross and disgusting but the court has it right.

    Legally, it's pretty simple: If you cannot prove that the defendant has died, then the case would stand. The lawyer filing to dismiss due to death should be required to file a death certificate with the court to prove such. Going only on the lawyer's word that his or her anonymous client is dead opens up a whole pile of possible ways for people in similar situations to avoid liability.

    At this point, the person is apparently dead. It looks like Mr Woods would have prevailed in the suit had the person not apparently passed on. Forcing the lawyers to drop the blind and reveal the identity so that the courts and plaintiff can be satisfied is key to making the justice system work fully.

    You might not like it but even with such a revolting case, it's not a bad thing.

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

    • icon
      Almost Anonymous (profile), 5 Jan 2017 @ 1:47pm

      Re:

      Completely incorrect. The proof of death could be given to the judge, who could then ascertain its veracity and close the case. There is no need for Woods' side to see that info.

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

      • icon
        JoeCool (profile), 5 Jan 2017 @ 4:51pm

        Re: Re:

        But it doesn't close the case. This is a civil suit (an oxymoron if there ever was), so proof of death would only result in the man's estate being made the defendant in his stead.

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

    • icon
      JMT (profile), 5 Jan 2017 @ 3:13pm

      Re:

      Just because something is legal, doesn't make it moral or ethical. A decent human being, something Woods clearly isn't, would drop this and back away. There is no possible way he can come out of this without being seen as the person who has zero empathy for grieving family and friends. The only sure outcome is broadcasting to the world what a complete asshole he is. His bruised ego must be massive to think that's a worthwhile trade-off.

      Also, who in their right mind is going to think Ken White is likely to lie to the court about a defendant's death?

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


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Copymouse
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.