Fairfax County General :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
niggar
()
Date: January 22, 2015 04:02PM
http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/article/20150116/NEWS/150119570/fairfax-attorney-claims-she-was-defamed-anonymously-by-fellow&template=fairfaxTimes
Two years ago, Fairfax County-based attorney Andi Geloo was contacted by one of her clients, asking her about disparaging comments she saw about Geloo on an online blog. The comments had been posted anonymously on the website www.FairfaxUnderground.com and attacked Geloo both personally with racial and sexual language, and professionally by derisively denouncing her as an attorney. Through correspondence with FairfaxUnderground administrator Cary Wiedemann, email carriers and exhaustive research of Internet Protocol (IP) addresses that took more than a year, she said she found out that two individuals who posted at least some of the comments were fellow Fairfax County attorneys.
She has named them in a defamation lawsuit she filed in Fairfax County Circuit Court in September 2014.
But because Virginia law has a one-year statute of limitations on defamation, her suit will likely go nowhere.
It is for this reason that she has helped to draft House Bill 1635, which has as its goal to extend the statute of limitations on defamation in Virginia. The bill is being patroned by Del. David B. Albo (R-Dist. 42) and is currently before the Virginia General Assembly.
“She came to me with this and I agreed that something needed to be done,” said Albo. “Everyone deserves their day in court and because of this loophole in the [Virginia law] code, it is nearly impossible for defamation victims to get justice.”
Geloo, a first-generation American, grew up in Fairfax the daughter of Indian immigrants and attended Fairfax High School. In 2003, she graduated in the top 10 percent of her law school class at George Washington University and later opened her own legal practice.
“I worked hard at building my reputation as a competent attorney,” she said. “As a woman I had to build respect, and I did that by trying cases and not being intimidated. It was a lot of work to build that reputation and I wasn’t about to have some anonymous cyber-bullies tear that down by posting defamatory lies about me. A lot of people told me there’s nothing you can do, let it go, get a tougher skin, but I said ‘would you tell your wife that if they said both sexually-based and professionally damaging things about her?’ You can imagine my shock when I found out they were attorneys that I know.”
Cyberbullying, often thought to be solely a teen issue, has actually become an issue around the country, regardless of one’s age. While it’s true that teens are being cyberbullied at alarming, almost epidemic rates, so too are adults. It is a problem that is even affecting professionals in the workplace, as Geloo unfortunately found out.
Although she took all the appropriate steps for legal action against those who cyberbullied her, she said the court system didn’t work in her favor. Before learning of her cyber-bulliers identities, she originally filed a lawsuit against eight “John Doe” defendants, listing the eight fictitious account names on FairfaxUnderground affiliated with the negative comments. She then subpoenaed Verizon, Cox and Time Warner, the carriers of the email IP addresses of the posters, to have them reveal the posters’ names. The carriers then contacted the posters, two of whom then anonymously hired attorneys, without publicly revealing their identities.
“The John Does’ attorney’s then filed motions to quash my efforts to have their client’s names revealed,” said Geloo. “Through delays and stalling that took months, they effectively pushed my suit past the statute of limitations.”
Although the suit had been filed within the statute of limitations, because the case was against “John Does” the elapsed time that the defending attorneys took to defend their clients was not “tolled.” This is a legal term meaning that the ticking deadline on the statute of limitations was not temporarily halted as the defending attorneys took their time to respond to Geloo’s attorneys. And because she had not yet garnered enough information to discern the identity of the posters, Geloo’s case based against “John Does” was ultimately weak.
On June 23, 2014, Fairfax County Circuit Court Judge Robert J. Smith ruled on the defending attorney’s motion to quash Geloo’s subpoena asking the internet companies to reveal the poster’s names.
Smith ruled that Geloo had not proven to his satisfaction that the identities of the posters should be revealed. “There is strong First Amendment protection if you want to speak anonymously and you should be able to do so,” said Fairfax County attorney Steve Bancroft, who represented Cox Cable and made an appearance in the case.
Since then, through other means, Geloo says she was able to conclusively discern the identities of the posters, at least two of whom turned out to be attorneys themselves.
But because the statute of limitations has elapsed, there is now little she can do.
“You have to understand that Judge Smith’s ruling was not a decision on the merits of my case,” she said. “It was simply one judge’s opinion on a motion to quash a subpoena. I was free to refile my case, and I did, with the real names of the parties. But now I am outside the one-year statute of limitations.”
Geloo added that the filing of the original case against John Does did not toll or preserve the statute of limitations on defamation.
“There is case law that specifically says John Doe lawsuits do not toll the statute,” she said. “That is why in Delegate Albo’s bill I am seeking to double the statute of limitations in defamation cases to two years, as well as adding a specific clause about internet defamation and the ability to have those cases qualify to be tolled. Something needs to be done so that this never happens to anyone else.”
Two years ago, Fairfax County-based attorney Andi Geloo was contacted by one of her clients, asking her about disparaging comments she saw about Geloo on an online blog. The comments had been posted anonymously on the website www.FairfaxUnderground.com and attacked Geloo both personally with racial and sexual language, and professionally by derisively denouncing her as an attorney. Through correspondence with FairfaxUnderground administrator Cary Wiedemann, email carriers and exhaustive research of Internet Protocol (IP) addresses that took more than a year, she said she found out that two individuals who posted at least some of the comments were fellow Fairfax County attorneys.
She has named them in a defamation lawsuit she filed in Fairfax County Circuit Court in September 2014.
But because Virginia law has a one-year statute of limitations on defamation, her suit will likely go nowhere.
It is for this reason that she has helped to draft House Bill 1635, which has as its goal to extend the statute of limitations on defamation in Virginia. The bill is being patroned by Del. David B. Albo (R-Dist. 42) and is currently before the Virginia General Assembly.
“She came to me with this and I agreed that something needed to be done,” said Albo. “Everyone deserves their day in court and because of this loophole in the [Virginia law] code, it is nearly impossible for defamation victims to get justice.”
Geloo, a first-generation American, grew up in Fairfax the daughter of Indian immigrants and attended Fairfax High School. In 2003, she graduated in the top 10 percent of her law school class at George Washington University and later opened her own legal practice.
“I worked hard at building my reputation as a competent attorney,” she said. “As a woman I had to build respect, and I did that by trying cases and not being intimidated. It was a lot of work to build that reputation and I wasn’t about to have some anonymous cyber-bullies tear that down by posting defamatory lies about me. A lot of people told me there’s nothing you can do, let it go, get a tougher skin, but I said ‘would you tell your wife that if they said both sexually-based and professionally damaging things about her?’ You can imagine my shock when I found out they were attorneys that I know.”
Cyberbullying, often thought to be solely a teen issue, has actually become an issue around the country, regardless of one’s age. While it’s true that teens are being cyberbullied at alarming, almost epidemic rates, so too are adults. It is a problem that is even affecting professionals in the workplace, as Geloo unfortunately found out.
Although she took all the appropriate steps for legal action against those who cyberbullied her, she said the court system didn’t work in her favor. Before learning of her cyber-bulliers identities, she originally filed a lawsuit against eight “John Doe” defendants, listing the eight fictitious account names on FairfaxUnderground affiliated with the negative comments. She then subpoenaed Verizon, Cox and Time Warner, the carriers of the email IP addresses of the posters, to have them reveal the posters’ names. The carriers then contacted the posters, two of whom then anonymously hired attorneys, without publicly revealing their identities.
“The John Does’ attorney’s then filed motions to quash my efforts to have their client’s names revealed,” said Geloo. “Through delays and stalling that took months, they effectively pushed my suit past the statute of limitations.”
Although the suit had been filed within the statute of limitations, because the case was against “John Does” the elapsed time that the defending attorneys took to defend their clients was not “tolled.” This is a legal term meaning that the ticking deadline on the statute of limitations was not temporarily halted as the defending attorneys took their time to respond to Geloo’s attorneys. And because she had not yet garnered enough information to discern the identity of the posters, Geloo’s case based against “John Does” was ultimately weak.
On June 23, 2014, Fairfax County Circuit Court Judge Robert J. Smith ruled on the defending attorney’s motion to quash Geloo’s subpoena asking the internet companies to reveal the poster’s names.
Smith ruled that Geloo had not proven to his satisfaction that the identities of the posters should be revealed. “There is strong First Amendment protection if you want to speak anonymously and you should be able to do so,” said Fairfax County attorney Steve Bancroft, who represented Cox Cable and made an appearance in the case.
Since then, through other means, Geloo says she was able to conclusively discern the identities of the posters, at least two of whom turned out to be attorneys themselves.
But because the statute of limitations has elapsed, there is now little she can do.
“You have to understand that Judge Smith’s ruling was not a decision on the merits of my case,” she said. “It was simply one judge’s opinion on a motion to quash a subpoena. I was free to refile my case, and I did, with the real names of the parties. But now I am outside the one-year statute of limitations.”
Geloo added that the filing of the original case against John Does did not toll or preserve the statute of limitations on defamation.
“There is case law that specifically says John Doe lawsuits do not toll the statute,” she said. “That is why in Delegate Albo’s bill I am seeking to double the statute of limitations in defamation cases to two years, as well as adding a specific clause about internet defamation and the ability to have those cases qualify to be tolled. Something needs to be done so that this never happens to anyone else.”
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
td6Nj
()
Date: January 22, 2015 04:46PM
yes? let's see the article then ! and since when are the words of blogs taken seriously ?
it's long been know that lawerys upload defamation about themselves to websites, sometimes employing a hacker to do so
simply so they can file a frivolous lawsuit
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
kmywP
()
Date: January 22, 2015 04:48PM
no doubt she also wants citizenship as the result of this "web injury"
that's so she doesn't have to fake being raped to get a citizenship under "vawa"
that's so she doesn't have to fake being raped to get a citizenship under "vawa"
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Oyez, oyez
()
Date: January 22, 2015 05:08PM
I would think that even if the statute problems remain unresolved, the disciplinary committees of local and state bar associations would have an interest in reviewing the evidence that the OP has collected.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
my thoughts exactly
()
Date: January 22, 2015 05:21PM
"There is strong First Amendment protection if you want to speak anonymously and you should be able to do so."
My thoughts exactly. People threaten you if you publicly speak your mind, also. Defamation, slander, etc. What ever happened to having an opinion and being able to speak it without some ass getting in a lather.
My thoughts exactly. People threaten you if you publicly speak your mind, also. Defamation, slander, etc. What ever happened to having an opinion and being able to speak it without some ass getting in a lather.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Ganesh
()
Date: January 22, 2015 05:22PM
Another fucking dot-head looking for a payday.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
LouderThanHell
()
Date: January 22, 2015 05:28PM
How many lawyers can you fit at the bottom of the ocean?
ALL OF THEM
ALL OF THEM
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
wonderful!!!!!!!!!
()
Date: January 22, 2015 05:30PM
LouderThanHell Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How many lawyers can you fit at the bottom of the
> ocean?
>
>
>
> ALL OF THEM
Lawyers like to sue and complain and threaten and strut around like they are gods or something. Most of them are lazy ass jerks who would rather drink and bill for hours than actually help somebody.
-------------------------------------------------------
> How many lawyers can you fit at the bottom of the
> ocean?
>
>
>
> ALL OF THEM
Lawyers like to sue and complain and threaten and strut around like they are gods or something. Most of them are lazy ass jerks who would rather drink and bill for hours than actually help somebody.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
fourlegs
()
Date: January 22, 2015 05:32PM
She's going to refile so watch what you say, her appeal may not be quashed.
___________________________________________________________
“Imitation is suicide.”
-Ralph Waldo Emerson
___________________________________________________________
“Imitation is suicide.”
-Ralph Waldo Emerson
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Sonny Drysdale
()
Date: January 22, 2015 05:38PM
She must be pretty obnoxious to have fellow members of the bar talk about her.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Oyez, oyez
()
Date: January 22, 2015 05:44PM
my thoughts exactly Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My thoughts exactly. People threaten you if you
> publicly speak your mind, also. Defamation,
> slander, etc. What ever happened to having an
> opinion and being able to speak it without some
> ass getting in a lather.
Too many morons absolutely misconstrue freedom. There is no unconstrained right to speak freely. So-called "free speech", like all rights, comes with limits and responsibilities. Lawyers in particular are obligated to respect those limits.
-------------------------------------------------------
> My thoughts exactly. People threaten you if you
> publicly speak your mind, also. Defamation,
> slander, etc. What ever happened to having an
> opinion and being able to speak it without some
> ass getting in a lather.
Too many morons absolutely misconstrue freedom. There is no unconstrained right to speak freely. So-called "free speech", like all rights, comes with limits and responsibilities. Lawyers in particular are obligated to respect those limits.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
so sue me
()
Date: January 22, 2015 06:00PM
Don't they make Geloo out of dead animals? Or is it just paste.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Sonny Drysdale
()
Date: January 22, 2015 06:16PM
Holy fuck! She sure holds a grudge. Her FB page is nothing but "poor me".
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
The Mike O'Meara Show
()
Date: January 22, 2015 06:31PM
WHERE are the nude pics of her? She sounds spunky and I love spunk.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
niggar
()
Date: January 22, 2015 06:35PM
Oyez, oyez Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> my thoughts exactly Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > My thoughts exactly. People threaten you if you
> > publicly speak your mind, also. Defamation,
> > slander, etc. What ever happened to having an
> > opinion and being able to speak it without some
> > ass getting in a lather.
>
> Too many morons absolutely misconstrue freedom.
> There is no unconstrained right to speak freely.
> So-called "free speech", like all rights, comes
> with limits and responsibilities. Lawyers in
> particular are obligated to respect those limits.
But her claims of "defamation" are completely false.
-------------------------------------------------------
> my thoughts exactly Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > My thoughts exactly. People threaten you if you
> > publicly speak your mind, also. Defamation,
> > slander, etc. What ever happened to having an
> > opinion and being able to speak it without some
> > ass getting in a lather.
>
> Too many morons absolutely misconstrue freedom.
> There is no unconstrained right to speak freely.
> So-called "free speech", like all rights, comes
> with limits and responsibilities. Lawyers in
> particular are obligated to respect those limits.
But her claims of "defamation" are completely false.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
fourlegs
()
Date: January 22, 2015 06:50PM
niggar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oyez, oyez Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > my thoughts exactly Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > My thoughts exactly. People threaten you if
> you
> > > publicly speak your mind, also. Defamation,
> > > slander, etc. What ever happened to having an
> > > opinion and being able to speak it without
> some
> > > ass getting in a lather.
> >
> > Too many morons absolutely misconstrue freedom.
>
> > There is no unconstrained right to speak freely.
>
> > So-called "free speech", like all rights, comes
> > with limits and responsibilities. Lawyers in
> > particular are obligated to respect those
> limits.
>
> But her claims of "defamation" are completely
> false.
I just read the definition of defamation and realized that her accusations are false.
___________________________________________________________
“Imitation is suicide.”
-Ralph Waldo Emerson
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oyez, oyez Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > my thoughts exactly Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > My thoughts exactly. People threaten you if
> you
> > > publicly speak your mind, also. Defamation,
> > > slander, etc. What ever happened to having an
> > > opinion and being able to speak it without
> some
> > > ass getting in a lather.
> >
> > Too many morons absolutely misconstrue freedom.
>
> > There is no unconstrained right to speak freely.
>
> > So-called "free speech", like all rights, comes
> > with limits and responsibilities. Lawyers in
> > particular are obligated to respect those
> limits.
>
> But her claims of "defamation" are completely
> false.
I just read the definition of defamation and realized that her accusations are false.
___________________________________________________________
“Imitation is suicide.”
-Ralph Waldo Emerson
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Tv watcher
()
Date: January 22, 2015 07:25PM
She was on channel 8 midday last week bitching and moaning about ffx underground.Seemed like an educated person but lacking common sense.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Sonny Drysdale
()
Date: January 22, 2015 07:31PM
Somebody should knock the curry outta her mouth. Who's sari now?
Posted by:
chuckhoffmann
()
Date: January 22, 2015 10:38PM
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/04/2015 01:01PM by chuckhoffmann.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/04/2015 01:01PM by chuckhoffmann.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Quoting Chuck Hoffman
()
Date: January 22, 2015 10:46PM
Quoting just to piss you off when you eventually come back and clear your post.
Hi!
chuckhoffmann Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tv watcher Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > She was on channel 8 midday last week bitching
> and
> > moaning about ffx underground.Seemed like an
> > educated person but lacking common sense.
>
> Her segment's on the WJLA Web site:
> http://www.wjla.com/blogs/lets-talk-live/2015/01/h
> ow-to-protect-yourself-against-cyberbullying-24213
> .html
Hi!
chuckhoffmann Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tv watcher Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > She was on channel 8 midday last week bitching
> and
> > moaning about ffx underground.Seemed like an
> > educated person but lacking common sense.
>
> Her segment's on the WJLA Web site:
> http://www.wjla.com/blogs/lets-talk-live/2015/01/h
> ow-to-protect-yourself-against-cyberbullying-24213
> .html
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
4WyU6
()
Date: January 22, 2015 10:48PM
^^^^^^
both links above are A LIE. they do not exist and or are impertinent
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Mango Polyps
()
Date: January 22, 2015 10:53PM
4WyU6 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> ^^^^^^
>
> both links above are A LIE. they do not exist and
> or are impertinent
>
Your post is a lie too... and not as much as you would have been scared of me and Steve’s cousin of the best way for you to know if any planetarium does not mean you have to marry outside your country of departure or destination for the next couple of years ago.
So there!
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> ^^^^^^
>
> both links above are A LIE. they do not exist and
> or are impertinent
>
Your post is a lie too... and not as much as you would have been scared of me and Steve’s cousin of the best way for you to know if any planetarium does not mean you have to marry outside your country of departure or destination for the next couple of years ago.
So there!
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
2funny
()
Date: January 22, 2015 10:55PM
Quoting Chuck Hoffman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Quoting just to piss you off when you eventually
> come back and clear your post.
>
> Hi!
>
> chuckhoffmann Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Tv watcher Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > She was on channel 8 midday last week
> bitching
> > and
> > > moaning about ffx underground.Seemed like an
> > > educated person but lacking common sense.
> >
> > Her segment's on the WJLA Web site:
> >
> http://www.wjla.com/blogs/lets-talk-live/2015/01/h
>
> >
> ow-to-protect-yourself-against-cyberbullying-24213
>
> > .html
hahaha
-------------------------------------------------------
> Quoting just to piss you off when you eventually
> come back and clear your post.
>
> Hi!
>
> chuckhoffmann Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Tv watcher Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > She was on channel 8 midday last week
> bitching
> > and
> > > moaning about ffx underground.Seemed like an
> > > educated person but lacking common sense.
> >
> > Her segment's on the WJLA Web site:
> >
> http://www.wjla.com/blogs/lets-talk-live/2015/01/h
>
> >
> ow-to-protect-yourself-against-cyberbullying-24213
>
> > .html
hahaha
Posted by:
chuckhoffmann
()
Date: January 22, 2015 11:00PM
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/04/2015 01:02PM by chuckhoffmann.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/04/2015 01:02PM by chuckhoffmann.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Quoting Chuck Hoffman
()
Date: January 22, 2015 11:08PM
I could do this all day, but I won't. I have a meager, but meaningful, life dusting chickens in local farms.
My newly formed "Army of Quotation" on FFU, however, will follow you to the Ends of the Earth, and perhaps Falls Church, to randomly quote your posts, keeping you mildly annoyed and amused. HA HA!!!
chuckhoffmann Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> chuckhoffmann Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Tv watcher Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > She was on channel 8 midday last week
> bitching
> > and
> > > moaning about ffx underground.Seemed like an
> > > educated person but lacking common sense.
> >
> > Her segment's on the WJLA Web site:
> >
> http://www.wjla.com/blogs/lets-talk-live/2015/01/h
>
> >
> ow-to-protect-yourself-against-cyberbullying-24213
>
> > .html
>
> Watched her segment. She name-checks Fairfax
> Underground at 1:24.
>
> No publicity is bad publicity.
My newly formed "Army of Quotation" on FFU, however, will follow you to the Ends of the Earth, and perhaps Falls Church, to randomly quote your posts, keeping you mildly annoyed and amused. HA HA!!!
chuckhoffmann Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> chuckhoffmann Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Tv watcher Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > She was on channel 8 midday last week
> bitching
> > and
> > > moaning about ffx underground.Seemed like an
> > > educated person but lacking common sense.
> >
> > Her segment's on the WJLA Web site:
> >
> http://www.wjla.com/blogs/lets-talk-live/2015/01/h
>
> >
> ow-to-protect-yourself-against-cyberbullying-24213
>
> > .html
>
> Watched her segment. She name-checks Fairfax
> Underground at 1:24.
>
> No publicity is bad publicity.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
JOOI
()
Date: January 22, 2015 11:30PM
She names one of the ATTY's. Richard Rowe.
Posted by:
chuckhoffmann
()
Date: January 22, 2015 11:53PM
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/04/2015 01:02PM by chuckhoffmann.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/04/2015 01:02PM by chuckhoffmann.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Quoting Chuck Hoffman
()
Date: January 23, 2015 12:30AM
Wouldn't that be Dick Roe?
chuckhoffmann Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JOOI Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > She names one of the ATTY's. Richard Rowe.
>
> No, the name she used was "Richard Roe", which is
> a common name used in legal proceedings when the
> name of the defendant is unknown, much like "John
> Doe". I don't doubt that the lawyers who stupidly
> defamed Geloo took full advantage of the legal
> system to keep their names out of court filings
> and therefore the press.
>
> Geloo named several John Does in addition to Cary,
> which is exactly what I would have expected for
> the initial filing of any lawsuit against Fairfax
> Underground.
chuckhoffmann Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JOOI Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > She names one of the ATTY's. Richard Rowe.
>
> No, the name she used was "Richard Roe", which is
> a common name used in legal proceedings when the
> name of the defendant is unknown, much like "John
> Doe". I don't doubt that the lawyers who stupidly
> defamed Geloo took full advantage of the legal
> system to keep their names out of court filings
> and therefore the press.
>
> Geloo named several John Does in addition to Cary,
> which is exactly what I would have expected for
> the initial filing of any lawsuit against Fairfax
> Underground.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Dane Bramage
()
Date: January 23, 2015 06:50AM
Sonny Drysdale Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> She must be pretty obnoxious to have fellow
> members of the bar talk about her.
My thought is she must be pretty darn good to have other attorneys feel threatened enough to smear her on FFXU. I hope we find out which attorneys were responsible, those are the ones that suck at their job.
The defamatory threads are now gone.
-------------------------------------------------
“We don’t have any rude, unpleasant people here. We’re different!”
-------------------------------------------------------
> She must be pretty obnoxious to have fellow
> members of the bar talk about her.
My thought is she must be pretty darn good to have other attorneys feel threatened enough to smear her on FFXU. I hope we find out which attorneys were responsible, those are the ones that suck at their job.
The defamatory threads are now gone.
-------------------------------------------------
“We don’t have any rude, unpleasant people here. We’re different!”
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Dick Burns
()
Date: January 23, 2015 06:50AM
Damn she's hot! I think I've seen her at the county courthouse before.
Andi- don't listen to these dickholes, you are a beautiful woman!!
Attachments:
Andi- don't listen to these dickholes, you are a beautiful woman!!
Attachments:
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
confused.,.,.,.,
()
Date: January 23, 2015 08:18AM
So you obtain an IP address. How do you prove that the person who holds the IP address is the person doing the posting?
What if they are using a general computer at work, registered to the office, with a system used by 1000 people? I suppose if they were also posting from a home computer, you could cross-match them. But, you still can't prove who is actually entering the information.
I don't have my name on any IP addresses and I post all the time. My spouse has the listing, and several other family members also use it.
What if they are using a general computer at work, registered to the office, with a system used by 1000 people? I suppose if they were also posting from a home computer, you could cross-match them. But, you still can't prove who is actually entering the information.
I don't have my name on any IP addresses and I post all the time. My spouse has the listing, and several other family members also use it.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
confused,.,.,.,.,.
()
Date: January 23, 2015 08:19AM
I also add that we can get on the internet at work without logging in using our access codes.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Wuyj9
()
Date: January 23, 2015 10:14AM
I was on a jury there in 2009, the guy next to me in the jury box was joking how hot one of the public defenders was. She looked similar to her, but I think more white.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
12mo
()
Date: January 23, 2015 10:20AM
She's a crybaby and comes from a country that doesn't value free speech so I guess that's why she has no problem trying to destroy it for everyone else.
Just because your feelings got hurt doesn't mean you get to shut everyone else up. Everyone talks about everyone, it's part of life. The only thing is, you usually never hear them say it, it happens EVERY FUCKING DAY!!! If your reputation is truly to the high standard that you believe it is then don't worry about it. Look at what the past/current presidents go through everyday as far as what the public says about them!!!! Someone saying something nasty about you doesn't change your life. Grow a backbone and live your life without trying to control everyone.
Just because your feelings got hurt doesn't mean you get to shut everyone else up. Everyone talks about everyone, it's part of life. The only thing is, you usually never hear them say it, it happens EVERY FUCKING DAY!!! If your reputation is truly to the high standard that you believe it is then don't worry about it. Look at what the past/current presidents go through everyday as far as what the public says about them!!!! Someone saying something nasty about you doesn't change your life. Grow a backbone and live your life without trying to control everyone.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Wonderful!!!!!!
()
Date: January 23, 2015 10:49AM
12mo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> She's a crybaby and comes from a country that
> doesn't value free speech so I guess that's why
> she has no problem trying to destroy it for
> everyone else.
>
> Just because your feelings got hurt doesn't mean
> you get to shut everyone else up. Everyone talks
> about everyone, it's part of life. The only thing
> is, you usually never hear them say it, it happens
> EVERY FUCKING DAY!!! If your reputation is truly
> to the high standard that you believe it is then
> don't worry about it. Look at what the
> past/current presidents go through everyday as far
> as what the public says about them!!!! Someone
> saying something nasty about you doesn't change
> your life. Grow a backbone and live your life
> without trying to control everyone.
People say nasty things about me every day. I either dish it right back or ignore them. You don't see me suing anybody. A lot of it is their mixed up perceptions. They also don't take the time to validate anything. They just make fun of me, which does nothing but show how narrow-minded and ignorant they are.
Some people say nasty things because they are just nasty people and need to shit on somebody in order to try to make themselves look better.
If everybody who had nasty things said about them went to court, nothing would get done, because everybody would be in court making lawyers rich.
-------------------------------------------------------
> She's a crybaby and comes from a country that
> doesn't value free speech so I guess that's why
> she has no problem trying to destroy it for
> everyone else.
>
> Just because your feelings got hurt doesn't mean
> you get to shut everyone else up. Everyone talks
> about everyone, it's part of life. The only thing
> is, you usually never hear them say it, it happens
> EVERY FUCKING DAY!!! If your reputation is truly
> to the high standard that you believe it is then
> don't worry about it. Look at what the
> past/current presidents go through everyday as far
> as what the public says about them!!!! Someone
> saying something nasty about you doesn't change
> your life. Grow a backbone and live your life
> without trying to control everyone.
People say nasty things about me every day. I either dish it right back or ignore them. You don't see me suing anybody. A lot of it is their mixed up perceptions. They also don't take the time to validate anything. They just make fun of me, which does nothing but show how narrow-minded and ignorant they are.
Some people say nasty things because they are just nasty people and need to shit on somebody in order to try to make themselves look better.
If everybody who had nasty things said about them went to court, nothing would get done, because everybody would be in court making lawyers rich.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Ugh the giant caveman
()
Date: January 23, 2015 11:01AM
I got news for her. her nephew looks like a monkey too.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
uhhh
()
Date: January 23, 2015 01:08PM
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/courts/circuit/pdf/opinions/cl-2013-9646-geloo-v-doe.pdf
A bit of a stretch for defamation...
A bit of a stretch for defamation...
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Manasshole
()
Date: January 23, 2015 01:10PM
In my opinion, it's all about the attention. After viewing what's avaiable on line, again my opinion, it was she who started the initial post giving herself a professional plug about how good she is doing traffic cases. Anyone whose been on this site knows the participants are quick to call "bullshit" when they smell a rat. It went down hill from there. And rather than cut her losses, in my opinion, she doubled down on the attention seeking and filed her law suits and whined to Albo. And again she gets what she wants, in my opinion, more attention. Wasn't it reported that she was getting communications of support from India? How more perfect could she have it?
This forum is not Face Book. On FB there is no dislike button. Here there is no dislike button either....you just get your ass kicked. Don't want to chance getting your ass kicked stay on FB. Don't start something here,in my opinion, if you don't want to be challenged.
This forum is not Face Book. On FB there is no dislike button. Here there is no dislike button either....you just get your ass kicked. Don't want to chance getting your ass kicked stay on FB. Don't start something here,in my opinion, if you don't want to be challenged.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Judge Judy
()
Date: January 23, 2015 01:14PM
Good luck trying that in a court of law!
LOSER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LOSER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Manasshole
()
Date: January 23, 2015 01:15PM
Oh..Yeah... And in my opinion, opinions are like assholes, everyone has one.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Manasshole
()
Date: January 23, 2015 01:20PM
See??? JudgeJudy makes my case for me. I never said anything about using my opinion in court. But JJ jumped in my shit putting words in my mouth. Is Judge Judy=Geeloo???
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Judge Judy
()
Date: January 23, 2015 01:25PM
Burt hit Manasshole in the mouth if he says one more thing!
I was not replying to you, you FUCKING MORON!
There is no way this tart will win this case
I was not replying to you, you FUCKING MORON!
There is no way this tart will win this case
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Manasshole
()
Date: January 23, 2015 01:38PM
Sorry
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
$$$$$$ down toilet
()
Date: January 23, 2015 01:52PM
How much money was spent on this nonsense? I read the judge's opinion. I like the part about "statements of opinion are generally not actionable because such statements cannot be objectively characterized as true or false" and the part about "speech that does not contain a provable false connotation is sometimes referred to as 'pure expressions of opinion' and cannot normally form the basis of an action for defamation".
My God, people can have opinions, and they aren't always nice. People are entitled to have an opinion. It might be different than yours, but it is their opinion.
People are entitled to opinions, FFU is an anonymous forum, people have the right to speak anonymously. That is why they are on the Underground.
Get over it.
I say LONG LIVE FFU. A breath of fresh air in a world totally wrapped up in suing people if they open their mouths.
My God, people can have opinions, and they aren't always nice. People are entitled to have an opinion. It might be different than yours, but it is their opinion.
People are entitled to opinions, FFU is an anonymous forum, people have the right to speak anonymously. That is why they are on the Underground.
Get over it.
I say LONG LIVE FFU. A breath of fresh air in a world totally wrapped up in suing people if they open their mouths.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
pWyeC
()
Date: January 23, 2015 01:54PM
confused.,.,.,., Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So you obtain an IP address. How do you prove that
> the person who holds the IP address is the person
> doing the posting?
FYI:
it's been televised that USA gov forces telco's to use advanced IP recording equipment (very expensive), which can if they please watch you as you browse or listen to you in your home though your phone isn't even on
beleive none of what you hear and half of what you see
all info you can google about IPV6 is an intricate lie
-------------------------------------------------------
> So you obtain an IP address. How do you prove that
> the person who holds the IP address is the person
> doing the posting?
FYI:
it's been televised that USA gov forces telco's to use advanced IP recording equipment (very expensive), which can if they please watch you as you browse or listen to you in your home though your phone isn't even on
beleive none of what you hear and half of what you see
all info you can google about IPV6 is an intricate lie
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
slkjernbj
()
Date: January 23, 2015 02:00PM
pWyeC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> confused.,.,.,., Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So you obtain an IP address. How do you prove
> that
> > the person who holds the IP address is the
> person
> > doing the posting?
>
> FYI:
>
> it's been televised that USA gov forces telco's to
> use advanced IP recording equipment (very
> expensive), which can if they please watch you as
> you browse or listen to you in your home though
> your phone isn't even on
>
> beleive none of what you hear and half of what you
> see
>
> all info you can google about IPV6 is an intricate
> lie
You are out of your mind.
I don't believe for a minute that Cox is watching me right now as I post on FFU. Anybody could be sitting at my computer posting stuff. I don't even have my name on the IP address.
Just how would you prove beyond any doubt that it was me posting anything????
-------------------------------------------------------
> confused.,.,.,., Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So you obtain an IP address. How do you prove
> that
> > the person who holds the IP address is the
> person
> > doing the posting?
>
> FYI:
>
> it's been televised that USA gov forces telco's to
> use advanced IP recording equipment (very
> expensive), which can if they please watch you as
> you browse or listen to you in your home though
> your phone isn't even on
>
> beleive none of what you hear and half of what you
> see
>
> all info you can google about IPV6 is an intricate
> lie
You are out of your mind.
I don't believe for a minute that Cox is watching me right now as I post on FFU. Anybody could be sitting at my computer posting stuff. I don't even have my name on the IP address.
Just how would you prove beyond any doubt that it was me posting anything????
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
YPHCj
()
Date: January 23, 2015 02:02PM
the law also prescribes freedom of association, the right of peers to gather and speak amongst themselves without government approval or monitoring
if ffu were the only website allowing speech one might claim it to be "public speech". however it is one of thousands or millions. participants are volunteers. the law doesn't aid someone volunteering to listen.
the law also doesn't prescribe that drunken rumors or female gossip spoken among volunteering listeners are the same as defamation (unless they get out of hand, are spead and believed - and the law does NOT prescibe that rumors should be believed nor does it prescribe you should trust anyone in any business deal and go to court if you get ripped off. much the opposite - there is a legal penalty for being stupid.)
the law doesn't say gossips should be monitored for possible defamation nor give gov the right to drop in to listen for it
if ffu were the only website allowing speech one might claim it to be "public speech". however it is one of thousands or millions. participants are volunteers. the law doesn't aid someone volunteering to listen.
the law also doesn't prescribe that drunken rumors or female gossip spoken among volunteering listeners are the same as defamation (unless they get out of hand, are spead and believed - and the law does NOT prescibe that rumors should be believed nor does it prescribe you should trust anyone in any business deal and go to court if you get ripped off. much the opposite - there is a legal penalty for being stupid.)
the law doesn't say gossips should be monitored for possible defamation nor give gov the right to drop in to listen for it
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Xn4p3
()
Date: January 23, 2015 02:03PM
OBAMA EATS MAGGOTS!
Attachments:
Attachments:
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
liut
()
Date: January 23, 2015 02:10PM
Xn4p3 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OBAMA EATS MAGGOTS!
OMG, defamation!!!!!!!!!!! POTUS will sue!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-------------------------------------------------------
> OBAMA EATS MAGGOTS!
OMG, defamation!!!!!!!!!!! POTUS will sue!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
3T4kE
()
Date: January 23, 2015 02:11PM
you said she's an illegal immigrant
there is NO SUCH THING as a "fairfax attorney". you mean attorney allowed to practice in Virginia (has verified the VA constitution has been read, and swore to uphold it - which no lawyer in fairfax is doing)
a fucking foreigner IS NOT A VA ATTORNEY because its illegal they are even staying in the country past vacation period - who bull-o-va gov brought in - according to the info above only
nothing above says she was born in USA or has any legal right to use USA moneys or facilities as if she owns them
the venue here is (foreign) citizen against USA citizen upon a tort having shown no injury or realistic reason to complain. the venue is illegal to begin with. there is no such venue.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
kjhgfyters
()
Date: January 23, 2015 02:12PM
liut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Xn4p3 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > OBAMA EATS MAGGOTS!
>
> OMG, defamation!!!!!!!!!!! POTUS will
> sue!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Wait-it's an OPINION. Sue anyway. Keep lawyers in business.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Xn4p3 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > OBAMA EATS MAGGOTS!
>
> OMG, defamation!!!!!!!!!!! POTUS will
> sue!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Wait-it's an OPINION. Sue anyway. Keep lawyers in business.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
JpHMe
()
Date: January 23, 2015 02:22PM
.
Attachments:
Attachments:
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
george "fing" bush
()
Date: January 23, 2015 02:23PM
of course i keep calling her an "itch"
the damn democrats took the W off all they keyboards !
the damn democrats took the W off all they keyboards !
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
HCxLc
()
Date: January 23, 2015 02:39PM
oh i thought it was redication !
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
multi-day deposition party
()
Date: January 23, 2015 02:42PM
slkjernbj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pWyeC Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > confused.,.,.,., Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > So you obtain an IP address. How do you prove
> > that
> > > the person who holds the IP address is the
> > person
> > > doing the posting?
> >
> > FYI:
> >
> > it's been televised that USA gov forces telco's
> to
> > use advanced IP recording equipment (very
> > expensive), which can if they please watch you
> as
> > you browse or listen to you in your home though
> > your phone isn't even on
> >
> > beleive none of what you hear and half of what
> you
> > see
> >
> > all info you can google about IPV6 is an
> intricate
> > lie
>
>
>
> You are out of your mind.
> I don't believe for a minute that Cox is watching
> me right now as I post on FFU. Anybody could be
> sitting at my computer posting stuff. I don't even
> have my name on the IP address.
> Just how would you prove beyond any doubt that it
> was me posting anything????
"Beyond a reasonable doubt" is the standard for criminal, not civil actions.
For civil actions it's "more likely than not".
Obviously you've never had the special feeling of being deposed for several hours a day over multiple days.
What I would do is in the deposition stage I would ask you if you were the one who made the post. You would of course lie and say no, and at that point you have committed perjury and are subject to whatever sanction the court decides to lay upon you.
I would ask you other fun questions, like who else has the ability to connect to the Internet from that IP address, and I would subpoena and depose ALL of them, as well.
I would ask each of them who they thought made the post, and since they're pissed off at having to miss a day of work and pay $350+ an hour for several hours of lawyer time, they'd all say YOU.
These are just a few of the things I'd do during discovery, but be assured that before I went to trial I would be able to prove that it was you that made the post. You would also be several thousand dollars poorer.
-------------------------------------------------------
> pWyeC Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > confused.,.,.,., Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > So you obtain an IP address. How do you prove
> > that
> > > the person who holds the IP address is the
> > person
> > > doing the posting?
> >
> > FYI:
> >
> > it's been televised that USA gov forces telco's
> to
> > use advanced IP recording equipment (very
> > expensive), which can if they please watch you
> as
> > you browse or listen to you in your home though
> > your phone isn't even on
> >
> > beleive none of what you hear and half of what
> you
> > see
> >
> > all info you can google about IPV6 is an
> intricate
> > lie
>
>
>
> You are out of your mind.
> I don't believe for a minute that Cox is watching
> me right now as I post on FFU. Anybody could be
> sitting at my computer posting stuff. I don't even
> have my name on the IP address.
> Just how would you prove beyond any doubt that it
> was me posting anything????
"Beyond a reasonable doubt" is the standard for criminal, not civil actions.
For civil actions it's "more likely than not".
Obviously you've never had the special feeling of being deposed for several hours a day over multiple days.
What I would do is in the deposition stage I would ask you if you were the one who made the post. You would of course lie and say no, and at that point you have committed perjury and are subject to whatever sanction the court decides to lay upon you.
I would ask you other fun questions, like who else has the ability to connect to the Internet from that IP address, and I would subpoena and depose ALL of them, as well.
I would ask each of them who they thought made the post, and since they're pissed off at having to miss a day of work and pay $350+ an hour for several hours of lawyer time, they'd all say YOU.
These are just a few of the things I'd do during discovery, but be assured that before I went to trial I would be able to prove that it was you that made the post. You would also be several thousand dollars poorer.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Jhhmgf
()
Date: January 23, 2015 02:55PM
But they can't prove it was me, either! They weren't there! How could they know? Conjecture, particularly if I am using a computer at work or at a hotel that hundreds of people have access to.
The judge already pointed out that people are allowed to have opinions. And a lot of opinions are not nice. So....
There are a lot of people out there that need to get off their high horses. They think they can say anything they want, then shit all over other people who want to do the same.
I say score one for FFU. Rock on.
The judge already pointed out that people are allowed to have opinions. And a lot of opinions are not nice. So....
There are a lot of people out there that need to get off their high horses. They think they can say anything they want, then shit all over other people who want to do the same.
I say score one for FFU. Rock on.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Asdfa troll is butthurt
()
Date: January 23, 2015 03:07PM
God I'd love to know who you are. You are the racist piece of shit yucky24 wingnut who has ruined this forum making it your personal stormfront. When we find out who you are... good luck.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
no curry fan
()
Date: January 23, 2015 04:26PM
Why do Indian chicks smell like curry? I mean, that girl is pretty enough to bone, but I get a whiff of curry just seeing her picture. Couldn't hit it
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Ugh the giant caveman
()
Date: January 23, 2015 09:59PM
I like this response to a comment made in her defense from the article in Fairfax Times..
"Grow up! This is what lawyers do when they get their toes stepped on in a free world like everyone else. Oh, there's got to be a Nanny bill to prevent this from every happening again. Baloney! And who is the kook you go to when you need an invasive and tyrannical bill sponsored - the IDIOT, DAVE ALBO. He, of the $3,000 traffic ticket. I met him when I was a student at GMU in the 90's and I assure you, he is a little tyrant with delusions of grandeur. I can't believe he has been in politics this long. Who are the morons that keep voting for him?
Keith Mahone"
"Grow up! This is what lawyers do when they get their toes stepped on in a free world like everyone else. Oh, there's got to be a Nanny bill to prevent this from every happening again. Baloney! And who is the kook you go to when you need an invasive and tyrannical bill sponsored - the IDIOT, DAVE ALBO. He, of the $3,000 traffic ticket. I met him when I was a student at GMU in the 90's and I assure you, he is a little tyrant with delusions of grandeur. I can't believe he has been in politics this long. Who are the morons that keep voting for him?
Keith Mahone"
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Ugh the giant caveman
()
Date: January 24, 2015 08:52AM
Looks like they deleted the comments in Fairfax times-LOL-
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
yourname
()
Date: January 24, 2015 10:18AM
Albo would take her case. His entire office is a complete waste of money.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
TrackStar
()
Date: January 25, 2015 12:46AM
Looks like she shaved a Uni-Brow
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Redundant Waste
()
Date: January 25, 2015 01:08AM
niggar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/article/20150116/NEWS/
> 150119570/fairfax-attorney-claims-she-was-defamed-
> anonymously-by-fellow&template=fairfaxTimes
>
>
> Two years ago, Fairfax County-based attorney Andi
> Geloo was contacted by one of her clients, asking
> her about disparaging comments she saw about Geloo
> on an online blog. The comments had been posted
> anonymously on the website
> www.FairfaxUnderground.com and attacked Geloo both
> personally with racial and sexual language, and
> professionally by derisively denouncing her as an
> attorney. Through correspondence with
> FairfaxUnderground administrator Cary Wiedemann,
> email carriers and exhaustive research of Internet
> Protocol (IP) addresses that took more than a
> year, she said she found out that two individuals
> who posted at least some of the comments were
> fellow Fairfax County attorneys.
>
> She has named them in a defamation lawsuit she
> filed in Fairfax County Circuit Court in September
> 2014.
>
> But because Virginia law has a one-year statute of
> limitations on defamation, her suit will likely go
> nowhere.
>
> It is for this reason that she has helped to draft
> House Bill 1635, which has as its goal to extend
> the statute of limitations on defamation in
> Virginia. The bill is being patroned by Del. David
> B. Albo (R-Dist. 42) and is currently before the
> Virginia General Assembly.
>
> “She came to me with this and I agreed that
> something needed to be done,” said Albo.
> “Everyone deserves their day in court and
> because of this loophole in the [Virginia law]
> code, it is nearly impossible for defamation
> victims to get justice.”
>
> Geloo, a first-generation American, grew up in
> Fairfax the daughter of Indian immigrants and
> attended Fairfax High School. In 2003, she
> graduated in the top 10 percent of her law school
> class at George Washington University and later
> opened her own legal practice.
>
> “I worked hard at building my reputation as a
> competent attorney,” she said. “As a woman I
> had to build respect, and I did that by trying
> cases and not being intimidated. It was a lot of
> work to build that reputation and I wasn’t about
> to have some anonymous cyber-bullies tear that
> down by posting defamatory lies about me. A lot of
> people told me there’s nothing you can do, let
> it go, get a tougher skin, but I said ‘would you
> tell your wife that if they said both
> sexually-based and professionally damaging things
> about her?’ You can imagine my shock when I
> found out they were attorneys that I know.”
>
> Cyberbullying, often thought to be solely a teen
> issue, has actually become an issue around the
> country, regardless of one’s age. While it’s
> true that teens are being cyberbullied at
> alarming, almost epidemic rates, so too are
> adults. It is a problem that is even affecting
> professionals in the workplace, as Geloo
> unfortunately found out.
>
> Although she took all the appropriate steps for
> legal action against those who cyberbullied her,
> she said the court system didn’t work in her
> favor. Before learning of her cyber-bulliers
> identities, she originally filed a lawsuit against
> eight “John Doe” defendants, listing the eight
> fictitious account names on FairfaxUnderground
> affiliated with the negative comments. She then
> subpoenaed Verizon, Cox and Time Warner, the
> carriers of the email IP addresses of the posters,
> to have them reveal the posters’ names. The
> carriers then contacted the posters, two of whom
> then anonymously hired attorneys, without publicly
> revealing their identities.
>
> “The John Does’ attorney’s then filed
> motions to quash my efforts to have their
> client’s names revealed,” said Geloo.
> “Through delays and stalling that took months,
> they effectively pushed my suit past the statute
> of limitations.”
>
> Although the suit had been filed within the
> statute of limitations, because the case was
> against “John Does” the elapsed time that the
> defending attorneys took to defend their clients
> was not “tolled.” This is a legal term meaning
> that the ticking deadline on the statute of
> limitations was not temporarily halted as the
> defending attorneys took their time to respond to
> Geloo’s attorneys. And because she had not yet
> garnered enough information to discern the
> identity of the posters, Geloo’s case based
> against “John Does” was ultimately weak.
>
> On June 23, 2014, Fairfax County Circuit Court
> Judge Robert J. Smith ruled on the defending
> attorney’s motion to quash Geloo’s subpoena
> asking the internet companies to reveal the
> poster’s names.
>
> Smith ruled that Geloo had not proven to his
> satisfaction that the identities of the posters
> should be revealed. “There is strong First
> Amendment protection if you want to speak
> anonymously and you should be able to do so,”
> said Fairfax County attorney Steve Bancroft, who
> represented Cox Cable and made an appearance in
> the case.
>
> Since then, through other means, Geloo says she
> was able to conclusively discern the identities of
> the posters, at least two of whom turned out to be
> attorneys themselves.
>
> But because the statute of limitations has
> elapsed, there is now little she can do.
>
> “You have to understand that Judge Smith’s
> ruling was not a decision on the merits of my
> case,” she said. “It was simply one judge’s
> opinion on a motion to quash a subpoena. I was
> free to refile my case, and I did, with the real
> names of the parties. But now I am outside the
> one-year statute of limitations.”
>
> Geloo added that the filing of the original case
> against John Does did not toll or preserve the
> statute of limitations on defamation.
>
> “There is case law that specifically says John
> Doe lawsuits do not toll the statute,” she said.
> “That is why in Delegate Albo’s bill I am
> seeking to double the statute of limitations in
> defamation cases to two years, as well as adding a
> specific clause about internet defamation and the
> ability to have those cases qualify to be tolled.
> Something needs to be done so that this never
> happens to anyone else.”
This sort of shit is a waste of time and expense. Even if the defamed party files on time with evidence conclusive of confirmed I.P. Addresses, the defamed party would be burdened with proving the owner of the I.P. address, actually did, in fact, post the defaming remarks.
This entire ordeal just proves that this attorney, Geloo, is the real bully. And that she knows nothing of her proclaimed profession as an attorney.
Besides, while your I.P. address server being able to be 'piggy backed' by another user with the simplest of devices, if simply in close range of the server, this attorney Geloo could and can not prove a damn thing in any court of law. Even in a Kangaroo court!
And, again, besides, if the so called defaming remarks were and are not true, then what, exactly, is this or any person obsessed with it about!
Attachments:
-------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/article/20150116/NEWS/
> 150119570/fairfax-attorney-claims-she-was-defamed-
> anonymously-by-fellow&template=fairfaxTimes
>
>
> Two years ago, Fairfax County-based attorney Andi
> Geloo was contacted by one of her clients, asking
> her about disparaging comments she saw about Geloo
> on an online blog. The comments had been posted
> anonymously on the website
> www.FairfaxUnderground.com and attacked Geloo both
> personally with racial and sexual language, and
> professionally by derisively denouncing her as an
> attorney. Through correspondence with
> FairfaxUnderground administrator Cary Wiedemann,
> email carriers and exhaustive research of Internet
> Protocol (IP) addresses that took more than a
> year, she said she found out that two individuals
> who posted at least some of the comments were
> fellow Fairfax County attorneys.
>
> She has named them in a defamation lawsuit she
> filed in Fairfax County Circuit Court in September
> 2014.
>
> But because Virginia law has a one-year statute of
> limitations on defamation, her suit will likely go
> nowhere.
>
> It is for this reason that she has helped to draft
> House Bill 1635, which has as its goal to extend
> the statute of limitations on defamation in
> Virginia. The bill is being patroned by Del. David
> B. Albo (R-Dist. 42) and is currently before the
> Virginia General Assembly.
>
> “She came to me with this and I agreed that
> something needed to be done,” said Albo.
> “Everyone deserves their day in court and
> because of this loophole in the [Virginia law]
> code, it is nearly impossible for defamation
> victims to get justice.”
>
> Geloo, a first-generation American, grew up in
> Fairfax the daughter of Indian immigrants and
> attended Fairfax High School. In 2003, she
> graduated in the top 10 percent of her law school
> class at George Washington University and later
> opened her own legal practice.
>
> “I worked hard at building my reputation as a
> competent attorney,” she said. “As a woman I
> had to build respect, and I did that by trying
> cases and not being intimidated. It was a lot of
> work to build that reputation and I wasn’t about
> to have some anonymous cyber-bullies tear that
> down by posting defamatory lies about me. A lot of
> people told me there’s nothing you can do, let
> it go, get a tougher skin, but I said ‘would you
> tell your wife that if they said both
> sexually-based and professionally damaging things
> about her?’ You can imagine my shock when I
> found out they were attorneys that I know.”
>
> Cyberbullying, often thought to be solely a teen
> issue, has actually become an issue around the
> country, regardless of one’s age. While it’s
> true that teens are being cyberbullied at
> alarming, almost epidemic rates, so too are
> adults. It is a problem that is even affecting
> professionals in the workplace, as Geloo
> unfortunately found out.
>
> Although she took all the appropriate steps for
> legal action against those who cyberbullied her,
> she said the court system didn’t work in her
> favor. Before learning of her cyber-bulliers
> identities, she originally filed a lawsuit against
> eight “John Doe” defendants, listing the eight
> fictitious account names on FairfaxUnderground
> affiliated with the negative comments. She then
> subpoenaed Verizon, Cox and Time Warner, the
> carriers of the email IP addresses of the posters,
> to have them reveal the posters’ names. The
> carriers then contacted the posters, two of whom
> then anonymously hired attorneys, without publicly
> revealing their identities.
>
> “The John Does’ attorney’s then filed
> motions to quash my efforts to have their
> client’s names revealed,” said Geloo.
> “Through delays and stalling that took months,
> they effectively pushed my suit past the statute
> of limitations.”
>
> Although the suit had been filed within the
> statute of limitations, because the case was
> against “John Does” the elapsed time that the
> defending attorneys took to defend their clients
> was not “tolled.” This is a legal term meaning
> that the ticking deadline on the statute of
> limitations was not temporarily halted as the
> defending attorneys took their time to respond to
> Geloo’s attorneys. And because she had not yet
> garnered enough information to discern the
> identity of the posters, Geloo’s case based
> against “John Does” was ultimately weak.
>
> On June 23, 2014, Fairfax County Circuit Court
> Judge Robert J. Smith ruled on the defending
> attorney’s motion to quash Geloo’s subpoena
> asking the internet companies to reveal the
> poster’s names.
>
> Smith ruled that Geloo had not proven to his
> satisfaction that the identities of the posters
> should be revealed. “There is strong First
> Amendment protection if you want to speak
> anonymously and you should be able to do so,”
> said Fairfax County attorney Steve Bancroft, who
> represented Cox Cable and made an appearance in
> the case.
>
> Since then, through other means, Geloo says she
> was able to conclusively discern the identities of
> the posters, at least two of whom turned out to be
> attorneys themselves.
>
> But because the statute of limitations has
> elapsed, there is now little she can do.
>
> “You have to understand that Judge Smith’s
> ruling was not a decision on the merits of my
> case,” she said. “It was simply one judge’s
> opinion on a motion to quash a subpoena. I was
> free to refile my case, and I did, with the real
> names of the parties. But now I am outside the
> one-year statute of limitations.”
>
> Geloo added that the filing of the original case
> against John Does did not toll or preserve the
> statute of limitations on defamation.
>
> “There is case law that specifically says John
> Doe lawsuits do not toll the statute,” she said.
> “That is why in Delegate Albo’s bill I am
> seeking to double the statute of limitations in
> defamation cases to two years, as well as adding a
> specific clause about internet defamation and the
> ability to have those cases qualify to be tolled.
> Something needs to be done so that this never
> happens to anyone else.”
This sort of shit is a waste of time and expense. Even if the defamed party files on time with evidence conclusive of confirmed I.P. Addresses, the defamed party would be burdened with proving the owner of the I.P. address, actually did, in fact, post the defaming remarks.
This entire ordeal just proves that this attorney, Geloo, is the real bully. And that she knows nothing of her proclaimed profession as an attorney.
Besides, while your I.P. address server being able to be 'piggy backed' by another user with the simplest of devices, if simply in close range of the server, this attorney Geloo could and can not prove a damn thing in any court of law. Even in a Kangaroo court!
And, again, besides, if the so called defaming remarks were and are not true, then what, exactly, is this or any person obsessed with it about!
Attachments:
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
'Conclusively Discern'
()
Date: January 25, 2015 01:23AM
Ugh the giant caveman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Looks like they deleted the comments in Fairfax
> times-LOL-
To 'conclusively discern' is NOT 'beyond a shadow of a doubt' in proving a persons guilt.
i.e. - example : 'uh, I might have let someone borrow my laptop that day', or, 'I lost then found my laptop that day in a dumbster', uh -
What Geloo needs is a good, multiply orgasmic night of wild romping sex with a real man!
-------------------------------------------------------
> Looks like they deleted the comments in Fairfax
> times-LOL-
To 'conclusively discern' is NOT 'beyond a shadow of a doubt' in proving a persons guilt.
i.e. - example : 'uh, I might have let someone borrow my laptop that day', or, 'I lost then found my laptop that day in a dumbster', uh -
What Geloo needs is a good, multiply orgasmic night of wild romping sex with a real man!
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
nolawyer
()
Date: January 25, 2015 04:37AM
Would not a complaint to the bar association produce a better result for her?
revenge would be someone anonymously posting the names of the two lawyers who posted.
revenge would be someone anonymously posting the names of the two lawyers who posted.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
smart man
()
Date: January 25, 2015 04:42AM
confused.,.,.,., Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So you obtain an IP address. How do you prove that
> the person who holds the IP address is the person
> doing the posting?
>
> What if they are using a general computer at work,
> registered to the office, with a system used by
> 1000 people? I suppose if they were also posting
> from a home computer, you could cross-match them.
> But, you still can't prove who is actually
> entering the information.
>
> I don't have my name on any IP addresses and I
> post all the time. My spouse has the listing, and
> several other family members also use it.
If you're thinking about writing something stupid on this site or any other and use the logic you're using, think about this: don't. The burden of proof in a civil case is not the same as in a criminal one. That's how OJ got acquitted for murder but lost the civil suit.
After all, obtaining a name out of thin air in a completely anonymous forum such as this is no mean feat. So, to both you and 'Conclusively Discern', be kind and familiarize yourself with that major and sobering difference. Even if the jury finds in the defendant's favor, you have still been forced to fork over serious cash to defend yourself, which may just have been the real punishment anyway.
It is not 'beyond a shadow of a doubt', it's beyond a reasonable doubt. And the way you're thinking of it, that's criminal court. Not civil.
-------------------------------------------------------
> So you obtain an IP address. How do you prove that
> the person who holds the IP address is the person
> doing the posting?
>
> What if they are using a general computer at work,
> registered to the office, with a system used by
> 1000 people? I suppose if they were also posting
> from a home computer, you could cross-match them.
> But, you still can't prove who is actually
> entering the information.
>
> I don't have my name on any IP addresses and I
> post all the time. My spouse has the listing, and
> several other family members also use it.
If you're thinking about writing something stupid on this site or any other and use the logic you're using, think about this: don't. The burden of proof in a civil case is not the same as in a criminal one. That's how OJ got acquitted for murder but lost the civil suit.
After all, obtaining a name out of thin air in a completely anonymous forum such as this is no mean feat. So, to both you and 'Conclusively Discern', be kind and familiarize yourself with that major and sobering difference. Even if the jury finds in the defendant's favor, you have still been forced to fork over serious cash to defend yourself, which may just have been the real punishment anyway.
It is not 'beyond a shadow of a doubt', it's beyond a reasonable doubt. And the way you're thinking of it, that's criminal court. Not civil.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
tough hide
()
Date: January 25, 2015 06:55AM
smart man Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> confused.,.,.,., Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So you obtain an IP address. How do you prove
> that
> > the person who holds the IP address is the
> person
> > doing the posting?
> >
> > What if they are using a general computer at
> work,
> > registered to the office, with a system used by
> > 1000 people? I suppose if they were also
> posting
> > from a home computer, you could cross-match
> them.
> > But, you still can't prove who is actually
> > entering the information.
> >
> > I don't have my name on any IP addresses and I
> > post all the time. My spouse has the listing,
> and
> > several other family members also use it.
>
>
> If you're thinking about writing something stupid
> on this site or any other and use the logic you're
> using, think about this: don't. The burden of
> proof in a civil case is not the same as in a
> criminal one. That's how OJ got acquitted for
> murder but lost the civil suit.
>
> After all, obtaining a name out of thin air in a
> completely anonymous forum such as this is no mean
> feat. So, to both you and 'Conclusively Discern',
> be kind and familiarize yourself with that major
> and sobering difference. Even if the jury finds in
> the defendant's favor, you have still been forced
> to fork over serious cash to defend yourself,
> which may just have been the real punishment
> anyway.
>
> It is not 'beyond a shadow of a doubt', it's
> beyond a reasonable doubt. And the way you're
> thinking of it, that's criminal court. Not civil.
###########I think it is just easier to grow a thicker skin than try to track somebody down off of the Underground. Unless you like throwing tons of cash around and doing a bunch of legal stuff. Oh yeh. That is what lawyers like to do. People say nasty stuff about people every day. Take them all to court. Off with their heads.
-------------------------------------------------------
> confused.,.,.,., Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So you obtain an IP address. How do you prove
> that
> > the person who holds the IP address is the
> person
> > doing the posting?
> >
> > What if they are using a general computer at
> work,
> > registered to the office, with a system used by
> > 1000 people? I suppose if they were also
> posting
> > from a home computer, you could cross-match
> them.
> > But, you still can't prove who is actually
> > entering the information.
> >
> > I don't have my name on any IP addresses and I
> > post all the time. My spouse has the listing,
> and
> > several other family members also use it.
>
>
> If you're thinking about writing something stupid
> on this site or any other and use the logic you're
> using, think about this: don't. The burden of
> proof in a civil case is not the same as in a
> criminal one. That's how OJ got acquitted for
> murder but lost the civil suit.
>
> After all, obtaining a name out of thin air in a
> completely anonymous forum such as this is no mean
> feat. So, to both you and 'Conclusively Discern',
> be kind and familiarize yourself with that major
> and sobering difference. Even if the jury finds in
> the defendant's favor, you have still been forced
> to fork over serious cash to defend yourself,
> which may just have been the real punishment
> anyway.
>
> It is not 'beyond a shadow of a doubt', it's
> beyond a reasonable doubt. And the way you're
> thinking of it, that's criminal court. Not civil.
###########I think it is just easier to grow a thicker skin than try to track somebody down off of the Underground. Unless you like throwing tons of cash around and doing a bunch of legal stuff. Oh yeh. That is what lawyers like to do. People say nasty stuff about people every day. Take them all to court. Off with their heads.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Ugh the giant caveman
()
Date: January 25, 2015 08:35AM
Whining publicly is better than the usual paki way... pouring a can of gasoline over one's head and lighting up.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Geloo Stick
()
Date: January 25, 2015 08:46AM
I just watched that video of her on Channel 9. No wonder people don't like her. First, she calls the Fairfax County courthouse "My courthouse". Second, she looks like she hopped up on amphetamines with all the twitching and shifty eye movements. She is not cute, but maybe feisty in the sack, or just a dead fish. This, of course, is only my opinion.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
TrackStar
()
Date: January 25, 2015 09:09AM
UNIBROW
just wait til it grows back
just wait til it grows back
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Genghis Swan
()
Date: January 26, 2015 12:27PM
The shitposts are strong with this one
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Sandra Fluke
()
Date: January 26, 2015 12:58PM
Andi has nothing on me!
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
niggar
()
Date: January 27, 2015 07:14AM
http://katzjustice.com/underdog/archives/3376-Stop-Virginia-HB-1635,-violating-the-First-Amendment-by-expanding-libel-plaintiffs-rights..html
Andi Geloo is now trying to expand what would count as libel and defamation. Get your legislators to stop this from happening
Andi Geloo is now trying to expand what would count as libel and defamation. Get your legislators to stop this from happening
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
samsinote
()
Date: January 27, 2015 12:31PM
Why stir up the hornets nest, if she just ignored it the post would die off and people don't give a shit.....typical scum lawyer...I am somewhat surprised that Dave Ablo has taken the case, as he is a really good dude and a great lawyer. I would not hire her if I needed a lawyer anyway she is too young for my opinion. Its like a kid crying to the teacher because the other kids make fun of her...pick yourself up and have some dignity.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
i know all about it
()
Date: January 28, 2015 02:53PM
samsinote Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why stir up the hornets nest, if she just ignored
> it the post would die off and people don't give a
> shit.....typical scum lawyer...I am somewhat
> surprised that Dave Ablo has taken the case, as he
> is a really good dude and a great lawyer. I would
> not hire her if I needed a lawyer anyway she is
> too young for my opinion. Its like a kid crying
> to the teacher because the other kids make fun of
> her...pick yourself up and have some dignity.
I have been called some horrible stuff on the underground. Really vulgar, ugly stuff. I have a reputation to uphold, also. You don't see me whining about it. I just ignore it.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why stir up the hornets nest, if she just ignored
> it the post would die off and people don't give a
> shit.....typical scum lawyer...I am somewhat
> surprised that Dave Ablo has taken the case, as he
> is a really good dude and a great lawyer. I would
> not hire her if I needed a lawyer anyway she is
> too young for my opinion. Its like a kid crying
> to the teacher because the other kids make fun of
> her...pick yourself up and have some dignity.
I have been called some horrible stuff on the underground. Really vulgar, ugly stuff. I have a reputation to uphold, also. You don't see me whining about it. I just ignore it.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Gruntled
()
Date: January 28, 2015 03:36PM
Is it even theoretically possible to defame a lawyer? I thought that a lawyer with good character is about as common as broccoli that tastes like chocolate. :)
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Manasshole
()
Date: January 28, 2015 03:44PM
You should see the shoes she wears to court?? In my opinion, she gets the Oscar for ugliest shoes on an attorney...Whew!
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Andi Geloo Nice Snatch
()
Date: January 28, 2015 04:01PM
Andi Geloo blew me in the court house mens room. Her hair looked really good with the 'semen conditioner' she used that day as well.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Manasshole
()
Date: January 28, 2015 06:09PM
Ooooo... Straight for the gutter. That's what I like about FFXU users. :-)
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Magnus Robot Fighter
()
Date: January 28, 2015 06:15PM
So what's her plan? If the bill passes into law, will she be able to re-file?
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
Manasshole
()
Date: January 28, 2015 07:08PM
Nah... She couldn't refile. The statute is only forward looking. She'll be able to claim perpetual victim hood. Forever! She still needs to ditch the platform shoes and come to terms with her height. All in my opinion, of course.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
niggar
()
Date: February 01, 2015 07:24PM
Magnus Robot Fighter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So what's her plan? If the bill passes into law,
> will she be able to re-file?
it's not likely the bill will pass to begin with.
-------------------------------------------------------
> So what's her plan? If the bill passes into law,
> will she be able to re-file?
it's not likely the bill will pass to begin with.
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
boo
()
Date: July 03, 2015 01:31PM
did it pass?
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
9hWJy
()
Date: July 03, 2015 01:57PM
they are passing laws like ill wind now - like scottish law "scotts laws"
anything recently passed really doesn't matter
anything recently passed really doesn't matter
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
yJywm
()
Date: July 03, 2015 01:58PM
they are passing them without legitimate backing, without intent to excersize equal access to law, nothing
they have zero respectability, and no one wouldn't argue at length anything they are doing
they have zero respectability, and no one wouldn't argue at length anything they are doing
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
eesh
()
Date: October 20, 2015 01:31PM
bump
http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2015/07/30/virginias-new-andis-law-fights-anonymous-harassers-on-the-internet/
On January 14, 2013, Andaleeb Geloo, a friendly and charismatic attorney at the Fairfax County Courthouse in Virginia, outside of Washington, D.C., got a shocking phone call from a recent client. Raised in the United States by immigrant parents from Pakistan, she had a stellar career and was well-liked by colleagues, who called her “Andi” and nicknamed her “the sweetheart of the courthouse.” She had graduated in the top 10 percent of her law school class at George Washington University in 2003 with high honors and academic awards, then launched a successful law firm.
But her client warned her that on a community website, FairfaxUnderground, anonymous users had posted vile, disparaging comments about Geloo’s sexuality, legal practice and physique, essentially “slut shaming” and “fat shaming” her. (Not that it mattered, but she was athletically fit.) The attorney initially ignored the warning. Then, days later, while representing clients at the Fairfax County Courthouse, she heard whispers about “the Geloo posts.” That night, she huddled over a computer and dared to open the FairfaxUnderground website. “I was compelled to look,” she says.
She was stunned by the vitriol hurled against her. About a week earlier, the client had written a favorable review about Geloo representing him well in court on a driving violation. About 20 minutes later, an anonymous writer using the ID “BEH” responded: “I hope you kill Andi and yourself in the fiery crash that you will inevitably cause.” Hours later, “Tea Baggins,” a sexual reference to a man putting his testicles into a sexual partner’s mouth, wrote, “This thread is useless without pictures of Andi.” The verbal assaults continued relentlessly for days.
User “Bang Bros,” using the name of a Miami-based porn film production company, chimed in, asking, “So … did you give Andi the old boosh kadoosh.” A user posted, “Andi Geloo — Bullshit Artist,” and “Andi Fan” responded to the “Tea Baggins” request for photos of Geloo, posting pictures of her from her Facebook page. An anonymous writer, calling her “a run of the mill court appointed attorney” accused her of writing her client’s positive review. (She hadn’t, and, in fact, didn’t advertise.) The conversation got slimier, with “fur” writing, “Andi Geloo equals FAT PAKI,” referencing a derogatory slur for Pakistanis. The poster “BS Detector” challenged Geloo’s trial expertise, adding, “Please post a picture of yourself from this week, including the full body.”
“Total Bullshit by Andi Geloo.” “Andi Geloo should be disbarred.” “Andi Geloo is a nut case who deserves to be outed [sic] . .. Whoever is [expletive]ing Andi Geloo must be doing it as a mercy case. LOL.” The obscene litany prompted Geloo to act.
Over the next two-and-a-half years, she became an accidental activist, investigating her anonymous “John Doe” antagonists and lobbying in the Virginia statehouse to expand a victim’s right to press charges. The resulting new state law—called “Andi’s Law,” by some—went into effect earlier this month in Virginia, with implications nationwide, as lawmakers in other states potentially expand the rights of plaintiffs against “John Doe” harassers on the Internet. The new “Andi’s Law” allows a plaintiff who has filed a timely lawsuit against a “John Doe” to motion the court to stop the clock, to give a plaintiff time to unmask a “John Doe.” Prior to this law, it was virtually impossible, at least in the case of anonymous bullying, to have a “cause of action,” which requires knowing the identity of a bully, within Virginia’s one-year statute of limitations for defamation.
“It’s new nationally. It will set precedent. Other states will recognize they have the same problem,” says Alan Cilman, an attorney in Fairfax. “John Doe” cyber bullies “try to ridicule and scorn and ruin reputations. And they’re doing it in a way that people can’t defend themselves. They are cowards. It’s always been a tough haul for women, and their cowardly tormenters should be held accountable.”
Often thought to be limited to children and teens, cyber-bullying is also an issue for adults. Last October, Pew Research Center released an exhaustive report on online bullying, finding 40 percent of Internet users had experienced some form of harassment online, and women had experienced the most severe form of harassment.
In the fall of 2014, MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry stopped re-tweeting messages, saying, “Because I fear that I would send all of…the harassment that comes to me over to some person who doesn’t deserve it.” Soon after that, NPR’s Rachel Martin did a segment, “Why Women Get the Worst of Internet Bullying.” This past March, actress Ashley Judd tweeted that when she “expressed a stout opinion during #MarchMadness I am called a whore, c—, threatened with sexual violence. Not okay.” She said on MSNBC, “The way things happen on social media is so abusive and everyone needs to take personal responsibility for what they write.”
That month, Monica Lewinsky, shamed for her involvement with President Clinton, delivered a much-watched TED Talk, arguing, “Public shaming as a blood sport has to stop.”
Rather than take to the media to expose her bullies, however, Geloo took a methodical, lawyerly approach, contacting the administrator at FairfaxUnderground, Cary Wiedemann. He initially didn’t remove the postings but sent her the Internet Protocol addresses for the messages. Wiedemann said he deleted “many posts,” leaving “a few innocuous opinions.”
IP addresses are unique numbers associated with a computer. While users can mask IP addresses, they are a way to identify anonymous Internet users. That week, Geloo called legal experts who advised her that she would never learn the identities of her “John Doe” bullies or get the posts removed. One attorney told her, “Get over it. Get thicker skin.” Another later ridiculed her cause, stating that it was more appropriate for TMZ.
“I decided to take matters into my own hands,” Geloo says. She knew the clock was ticking on the one year plaintiffs have to file a defamation lawsuit. “I was tortured by it,” she says. She stayed up through the night and wrote up a 10-page lawsuit against Wiedemann and twelve “John Doe” defendants who had written negative comments on Fairfax Underground. She was seeking to unmask their identities. An attorney friend, Susan Earman, filed the lawsuit at Fairfax County Circuit Court, where Geloo practiced law. Eventually, Wiedemann agreed to remove the posts, and Geloo dropped him from the lawsuit.
Geloo filed “John Doe subpoenas” with the three telecommunications companies –Verizon Communications Inc., Cox Communications Inc. and Time Warner Cable Inc. – who were the Internet service providers for the IP addresses associated with the various “John Doe” comments. She wanted them to provide the real names of the “John Doe” harassers so she could file a defamation complaint against them within the one-year limit. The companies contacted the “John Doe” defendants and two of them hired local attorneys – anonymously. One of the defense firms was Bancroft, McGavin, Horvath and Judkins, based in Fairfax. The two “John Doe” attorneys filed motions to block Geloo from learning their clients’ names. The clock was still ticking on the statute of limitations. It wasn’t “tolled,” a legal term that means the clock is temporarily halted, while the decision to withhold or make public the real identity of the “John Doe” defendants was adjudicated. No other attorneys stepped forward to represent “John Doe” defendants.
One day, Geloo received correspondence from an insurance carrier, Allstate Corp. — a copy of a letter, dated Feb. 25, 2014, and addressed to a local attorney, Demetrious Pikrallidas. It concerned a claim Pikrallidas had filed, stating that he was one of the defendants in Geloo’s defamation lawsuit. (A receptionist at the firm of Pikrallidas directed questions to the firm of Bancroft, McGavin, Horvath and Judkins, the firm that was representing a “John Doe” in the Geloo case. There, an attorney representing Pikrallidas told Women in the World his client declined to comment. When Geloo filed a complaint with the Virginia State Bar, Pikrallidas responded, through another attorney, that that he considered Geloo’s allegations unfair, but he declined to comment to the state bar on whether he wrote any disparaging comments against Geloo).
Geloo hadn’t named anyone in her “John Doe” complaint, because she didn’t know any of the names of her anonymous bullies. Now, with this letter in her hand, she had made a significant breakthrough. To be sure, the letter didn’t confirm or deny that the lawyer was the one who actually wrote any of the messages, just that he was a defendant in the case, Geloo vs. John Does, et al. But she had just missed the one-year statute of limitations to file a lawsuit. As defense attorneys challenged the complaint, delaying it further in the court, the clock had expired.
On June 23, 2014 Fairfax County Circuit Court Judge Robert J. Smith ruled against Geloo’s motion to have the telecommunication companies reveal the real identities of the “John Doe” defendants because “the statement at issue does not involve a criminal offense involving moral turpitude or a contagious disease,” nor did it “impliedly suggest” Geloo was “guilty of unethical or unprofessional conduct such as false advertising.” The telecommunication companies didn’t have to reveal the names of the “John Doe” bullies. Geloo had lost in court.
“I was offered a lot of money to settle and sign a non-disclosure agreement,” she says. “I felt taking their money with a deal to shut up, was ‘blood money.’ I felt I owed it to the bar to find out their names. Seriously, you can always make more money, but you can never get your life back.”
A few days later, an attorney passed Geloo in the halls of a local courthouse and said, “I heard you had a crush on me.” When she responded, confused, that she didn’t and that she was married, he answered, “Somebody has taken mercy on you.”
Geloo’s eyes widened. That was the same language used by one of her “John Doe” detractors. Geloo filed her subpoena request again. To her surprise, the “John Doe” attorneys didn’t file objections. Instead, she received a response from Verizon, dated Sept. 12, 2014. It named a local lawyer in Manassas, Va., Brian Patrick Roman, as the owner of the IP for one of the “John Doe” defendants. Geloo filed another complaint with the Virginia State Bar.
He was the lawyer who had spoken to Geloo in the halls of the courthouse, alleging she had a “crush.” Despite repeated efforts to contact Roman, he declined to comment for this article.
The Virginia Bar Association said it couldn’t release the results of Geloo’s complaints against the lawyers identified in the Verizon and Allstate letters. According to letters sent to Geloo, however, the state bar dismissed the complaints against the two attorneys, who denied they had acted improperly. Anastasia Billy, assistant bar counsel at the state bar association, wrote, that the “Virginia Rule of Professional Conduct” doesn’t cover a lawyer’s communications with another lawyer, but she stated, “The Virginia State Bar does not condone rude, unprofessional, or offensive behavior.” In a letter to the Virginia State Bar, Roman accused Geloo of “bizarre behavior,” revealing “confidential” information and leveling “false and malicious” charges against him. Armed with the Verizon information, Geloo might have filed a new lawsuit. But, again, the statute of limitations had elapsed.
There was one thing to do, she concluded. Change the law. She drafted House Bill 1635 to allow a defamation lawsuit against a “John Doe” to “toll,” or stop the clock, for a reasonable amount of time to discover the real identity of a “John Doe.” A colleague in the Virginia state legislature, Del. David B. Albo (R-Dist. 42), introduced the legislation, which passed the Virginia state legislature this spring.
Says Albo, “The way America works, you get your opportunity to be heard. Andi was unable to get into court to state her case. It was literally impossible for her to get the names of these people who were hiding like cowards behind anonymous Internet identities. There was a problem with the law, and we had to fix it.” He noted that when defamation laws were first written, “the Internet didn’t exist, with its capacity for anonymous identities. We need to update the law to match the situation in 2015.”
“Publicity was something I never sought,” said Geloo. “In fact, I cherish my privacy. But when you are bullied and attacked this viciously by people you hardly know—your own colleagues—you have to take a stand. Lawyers should not engage in such unprofessional conduct in public or anonymously. It brings disgrace to our profession. My lawsuit was filed to protect my practice and me, but also to protect the members of the bar from such disgrace, not for self-aggrandizement.”
Her legal victory may not mitigate the discomfort she feels when she comes into contact with the alleged bullies in question.
“When I see the attorneys, I feel anxiety because one attorney taunted me when I saw him, and I feel disappointment because I referred cases to the other attorney’s firm. I had always been kind to both,” Geloo says.
Nonetheless, she is satisfied. “I accomplished what I set out to do,” she says. “I won.”
http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2015/07/30/virginias-new-andis-law-fights-anonymous-harassers-on-the-internet/
When the law prevented Andaleeb Geloo from taking legal action against her Internet bullies, she changed the law.
On January 14, 2013, Andaleeb Geloo, a friendly and charismatic attorney at the Fairfax County Courthouse in Virginia, outside of Washington, D.C., got a shocking phone call from a recent client. Raised in the United States by immigrant parents from Pakistan, she had a stellar career and was well-liked by colleagues, who called her “Andi” and nicknamed her “the sweetheart of the courthouse.” She had graduated in the top 10 percent of her law school class at George Washington University in 2003 with high honors and academic awards, then launched a successful law firm.
But her client warned her that on a community website, FairfaxUnderground, anonymous users had posted vile, disparaging comments about Geloo’s sexuality, legal practice and physique, essentially “slut shaming” and “fat shaming” her. (Not that it mattered, but she was athletically fit.) The attorney initially ignored the warning. Then, days later, while representing clients at the Fairfax County Courthouse, she heard whispers about “the Geloo posts.” That night, she huddled over a computer and dared to open the FairfaxUnderground website. “I was compelled to look,” she says.
She was stunned by the vitriol hurled against her. About a week earlier, the client had written a favorable review about Geloo representing him well in court on a driving violation. About 20 minutes later, an anonymous writer using the ID “BEH” responded: “I hope you kill Andi and yourself in the fiery crash that you will inevitably cause.” Hours later, “Tea Baggins,” a sexual reference to a man putting his testicles into a sexual partner’s mouth, wrote, “This thread is useless without pictures of Andi.” The verbal assaults continued relentlessly for days.
User “Bang Bros,” using the name of a Miami-based porn film production company, chimed in, asking, “So … did you give Andi the old boosh kadoosh.” A user posted, “Andi Geloo — Bullshit Artist,” and “Andi Fan” responded to the “Tea Baggins” request for photos of Geloo, posting pictures of her from her Facebook page. An anonymous writer, calling her “a run of the mill court appointed attorney” accused her of writing her client’s positive review. (She hadn’t, and, in fact, didn’t advertise.) The conversation got slimier, with “fur” writing, “Andi Geloo equals FAT PAKI,” referencing a derogatory slur for Pakistanis. The poster “BS Detector” challenged Geloo’s trial expertise, adding, “Please post a picture of yourself from this week, including the full body.”
“Total Bullshit by Andi Geloo.” “Andi Geloo should be disbarred.” “Andi Geloo is a nut case who deserves to be outed [sic] . .. Whoever is [expletive]ing Andi Geloo must be doing it as a mercy case. LOL.” The obscene litany prompted Geloo to act.
Over the next two-and-a-half years, she became an accidental activist, investigating her anonymous “John Doe” antagonists and lobbying in the Virginia statehouse to expand a victim’s right to press charges. The resulting new state law—called “Andi’s Law,” by some—went into effect earlier this month in Virginia, with implications nationwide, as lawmakers in other states potentially expand the rights of plaintiffs against “John Doe” harassers on the Internet. The new “Andi’s Law” allows a plaintiff who has filed a timely lawsuit against a “John Doe” to motion the court to stop the clock, to give a plaintiff time to unmask a “John Doe.” Prior to this law, it was virtually impossible, at least in the case of anonymous bullying, to have a “cause of action,” which requires knowing the identity of a bully, within Virginia’s one-year statute of limitations for defamation.
“It’s new nationally. It will set precedent. Other states will recognize they have the same problem,” says Alan Cilman, an attorney in Fairfax. “John Doe” cyber bullies “try to ridicule and scorn and ruin reputations. And they’re doing it in a way that people can’t defend themselves. They are cowards. It’s always been a tough haul for women, and their cowardly tormenters should be held accountable.”
Often thought to be limited to children and teens, cyber-bullying is also an issue for adults. Last October, Pew Research Center released an exhaustive report on online bullying, finding 40 percent of Internet users had experienced some form of harassment online, and women had experienced the most severe form of harassment.
In the fall of 2014, MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry stopped re-tweeting messages, saying, “Because I fear that I would send all of…the harassment that comes to me over to some person who doesn’t deserve it.” Soon after that, NPR’s Rachel Martin did a segment, “Why Women Get the Worst of Internet Bullying.” This past March, actress Ashley Judd tweeted that when she “expressed a stout opinion during #MarchMadness I am called a whore, c—, threatened with sexual violence. Not okay.” She said on MSNBC, “The way things happen on social media is so abusive and everyone needs to take personal responsibility for what they write.”
That month, Monica Lewinsky, shamed for her involvement with President Clinton, delivered a much-watched TED Talk, arguing, “Public shaming as a blood sport has to stop.”
Rather than take to the media to expose her bullies, however, Geloo took a methodical, lawyerly approach, contacting the administrator at FairfaxUnderground, Cary Wiedemann. He initially didn’t remove the postings but sent her the Internet Protocol addresses for the messages. Wiedemann said he deleted “many posts,” leaving “a few innocuous opinions.”
IP addresses are unique numbers associated with a computer. While users can mask IP addresses, they are a way to identify anonymous Internet users. That week, Geloo called legal experts who advised her that she would never learn the identities of her “John Doe” bullies or get the posts removed. One attorney told her, “Get over it. Get thicker skin.” Another later ridiculed her cause, stating that it was more appropriate for TMZ.
“I decided to take matters into my own hands,” Geloo says. She knew the clock was ticking on the one year plaintiffs have to file a defamation lawsuit. “I was tortured by it,” she says. She stayed up through the night and wrote up a 10-page lawsuit against Wiedemann and twelve “John Doe” defendants who had written negative comments on Fairfax Underground. She was seeking to unmask their identities. An attorney friend, Susan Earman, filed the lawsuit at Fairfax County Circuit Court, where Geloo practiced law. Eventually, Wiedemann agreed to remove the posts, and Geloo dropped him from the lawsuit.
Geloo filed “John Doe subpoenas” with the three telecommunications companies –Verizon Communications Inc., Cox Communications Inc. and Time Warner Cable Inc. – who were the Internet service providers for the IP addresses associated with the various “John Doe” comments. She wanted them to provide the real names of the “John Doe” harassers so she could file a defamation complaint against them within the one-year limit. The companies contacted the “John Doe” defendants and two of them hired local attorneys – anonymously. One of the defense firms was Bancroft, McGavin, Horvath and Judkins, based in Fairfax. The two “John Doe” attorneys filed motions to block Geloo from learning their clients’ names. The clock was still ticking on the statute of limitations. It wasn’t “tolled,” a legal term that means the clock is temporarily halted, while the decision to withhold or make public the real identity of the “John Doe” defendants was adjudicated. No other attorneys stepped forward to represent “John Doe” defendants.
One day, Geloo received correspondence from an insurance carrier, Allstate Corp. — a copy of a letter, dated Feb. 25, 2014, and addressed to a local attorney, Demetrious Pikrallidas. It concerned a claim Pikrallidas had filed, stating that he was one of the defendants in Geloo’s defamation lawsuit. (A receptionist at the firm of Pikrallidas directed questions to the firm of Bancroft, McGavin, Horvath and Judkins, the firm that was representing a “John Doe” in the Geloo case. There, an attorney representing Pikrallidas told Women in the World his client declined to comment. When Geloo filed a complaint with the Virginia State Bar, Pikrallidas responded, through another attorney, that that he considered Geloo’s allegations unfair, but he declined to comment to the state bar on whether he wrote any disparaging comments against Geloo).
Geloo hadn’t named anyone in her “John Doe” complaint, because she didn’t know any of the names of her anonymous bullies. Now, with this letter in her hand, she had made a significant breakthrough. To be sure, the letter didn’t confirm or deny that the lawyer was the one who actually wrote any of the messages, just that he was a defendant in the case, Geloo vs. John Does, et al. But she had just missed the one-year statute of limitations to file a lawsuit. As defense attorneys challenged the complaint, delaying it further in the court, the clock had expired.
On June 23, 2014 Fairfax County Circuit Court Judge Robert J. Smith ruled against Geloo’s motion to have the telecommunication companies reveal the real identities of the “John Doe” defendants because “the statement at issue does not involve a criminal offense involving moral turpitude or a contagious disease,” nor did it “impliedly suggest” Geloo was “guilty of unethical or unprofessional conduct such as false advertising.” The telecommunication companies didn’t have to reveal the names of the “John Doe” bullies. Geloo had lost in court.
“I was offered a lot of money to settle and sign a non-disclosure agreement,” she says. “I felt taking their money with a deal to shut up, was ‘blood money.’ I felt I owed it to the bar to find out their names. Seriously, you can always make more money, but you can never get your life back.”
A few days later, an attorney passed Geloo in the halls of a local courthouse and said, “I heard you had a crush on me.” When she responded, confused, that she didn’t and that she was married, he answered, “Somebody has taken mercy on you.”
Geloo’s eyes widened. That was the same language used by one of her “John Doe” detractors. Geloo filed her subpoena request again. To her surprise, the “John Doe” attorneys didn’t file objections. Instead, she received a response from Verizon, dated Sept. 12, 2014. It named a local lawyer in Manassas, Va., Brian Patrick Roman, as the owner of the IP for one of the “John Doe” defendants. Geloo filed another complaint with the Virginia State Bar.
He was the lawyer who had spoken to Geloo in the halls of the courthouse, alleging she had a “crush.” Despite repeated efforts to contact Roman, he declined to comment for this article.
The Virginia Bar Association said it couldn’t release the results of Geloo’s complaints against the lawyers identified in the Verizon and Allstate letters. According to letters sent to Geloo, however, the state bar dismissed the complaints against the two attorneys, who denied they had acted improperly. Anastasia Billy, assistant bar counsel at the state bar association, wrote, that the “Virginia Rule of Professional Conduct” doesn’t cover a lawyer’s communications with another lawyer, but she stated, “The Virginia State Bar does not condone rude, unprofessional, or offensive behavior.” In a letter to the Virginia State Bar, Roman accused Geloo of “bizarre behavior,” revealing “confidential” information and leveling “false and malicious” charges against him. Armed with the Verizon information, Geloo might have filed a new lawsuit. But, again, the statute of limitations had elapsed.
There was one thing to do, she concluded. Change the law. She drafted House Bill 1635 to allow a defamation lawsuit against a “John Doe” to “toll,” or stop the clock, for a reasonable amount of time to discover the real identity of a “John Doe.” A colleague in the Virginia state legislature, Del. David B. Albo (R-Dist. 42), introduced the legislation, which passed the Virginia state legislature this spring.
Says Albo, “The way America works, you get your opportunity to be heard. Andi was unable to get into court to state her case. It was literally impossible for her to get the names of these people who were hiding like cowards behind anonymous Internet identities. There was a problem with the law, and we had to fix it.” He noted that when defamation laws were first written, “the Internet didn’t exist, with its capacity for anonymous identities. We need to update the law to match the situation in 2015.”
“Publicity was something I never sought,” said Geloo. “In fact, I cherish my privacy. But when you are bullied and attacked this viciously by people you hardly know—your own colleagues—you have to take a stand. Lawyers should not engage in such unprofessional conduct in public or anonymously. It brings disgrace to our profession. My lawsuit was filed to protect my practice and me, but also to protect the members of the bar from such disgrace, not for self-aggrandizement.”
Her legal victory may not mitigate the discomfort she feels when she comes into contact with the alleged bullies in question.
“When I see the attorneys, I feel anxiety because one attorney taunted me when I saw him, and I feel disappointment because I referred cases to the other attorney’s firm. I had always been kind to both,” Geloo says.
Nonetheless, she is satisfied. “I accomplished what I set out to do,” she says. “I won.”
Re: Fairfax attorney claims she was defamed anonymously by fairfax underground users
Posted by:
stephen
()
Date: October 20, 2015 06:46PM
She has dave Albo writing the Law. if I recall it was Dave Albo that wrote the Law that said residents of Virginia have to pay higher Motor vehicle Fines than out of state residents. VOTE TRUMP. It's time to clean house and Albo needs to go.