Roy Moore's Threat Letter To Sue The Press Is An Artform In Bad Lawyering
from the is-this-real-life? dept
By now it's become something of a pattern over the past few months, after many of the recent accusations come out about sexual harassment, abuse (or worse), lawyers representing the powerful men accused of such horrible acts threaten or promise to sue, often on incredibly flimsy reasons. In most cases, no such lawsuits will ever be filed. This is, in part, because the accusers know they have no case and in part because they know that if the case gets that far, going through discovery is likely to backfire big time. But, of course, for decades people have (often falsely) believed that in place of a real basis for making a legal threat, pure bluster will suffice.
The bluster in these letters is often impressive, but we have a new entrant that I think may quickly shoot to the top of the list. Roy Moore, of course, was the former Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, which would lead you to believe he knows a lot of good lawyers. And, yet, somehow, he ended up with Trenton Garmon. Garmon made some news earlier this week when he went on CNN with Don Lemon and called him "Don Lemon Squeezy Keep It Easy" But then he followed it up by sending one of the most profoundly ridiculous threat letters we've ever seen to the Alabama Media Group, the publisher of al.com, which has been reporting on Moore. You can click the link, or see it embedded below. It's fairly astounding. Beyond the poor grammar and the typos, it makes no sense.
It starts out by basically arguing that AL.com's reporting was "careless" (a bit ironic, given the mistakes in the letter) but (as is typical of threat letters of this nature) without giving many specifics. It does claim that the reporting on Moore signing a high school yearbook was untrue, but does so in a weird way:
Your client as an outlet is carelessly and perhaps maliciously reporting that my client, Judge Roy S. Moore, noted and signed a Yearbook of an accuser as a "DA" and in a manner which experts, to include our own, have confirmed is not consistent with his handwriting (To wit: structure, strokes, slant, base alignment, etc.) and does not comport to his typical vernacular.
And then it makes bizarre and nonsensical arguments about spoliation, which isn't exactly relevant here:
Please also note that per Alabama law there is a Third Party Tort for Spoliation. Thus, even if your client is not a held to have defamed or otherwise worked civil damages upon our clients, your client may remain responsible in a Court of law for damages caused by failure to preserve evidence. This is often times referred to as "Adversse Interference."
"Worked civil damages upon our clients?" Huh?
And then the letter gets into defamation, first defining defamation (poorly) and then accuses the site of having "inteionally refused to advance the truth regarding our clients." As to what, specifically, was defamatory... well, Garmon mentions that a report claimed five women have accused Moore, while Garmon says it was just two. No really. And who starts a paragraph (let alone a sentence) with the word "meaning"?
Meaning your client has used terms in reports maliciously or carelessly which has falsely portrayed our clients. Specifically your client's reports have indicated there are five [5] women accusing Chief Justice Roy Moore of sexual misconduct when in fact only two [2] women have made accusations of sexual misconduct. And both of these women have made false statements which your client has yet to publish. The other ladies which were rounded up in the witch hunt merely allege they perceived him to have made advances, but do not accuse him of any sexual misconduct.
When your claim of defamation is based on the fact that some of the women only accused your client of being a creep, rather than a full-on abuser, you're not in a very strong legal position. Also, is Garmon really suggesting that Al.com can be accused of defamation for not printing false statements? Huh?
Legal Twitter has been having a blast in response to this, though my favorite has been the pseudonymous legal blogger Tweeter @nycsouthpaw, who marked up the letter:
pls find my comments on Moore's lawyer's letter attached pic.twitter.com/Ohfh80QYuh
— southpaw (@nycsouthpaw) November 15, 2017
Popehat won't even touch it:
People are suggesting I write about Roy Moore's lawyer's threat letter. Write what? How would I begin? Would you footnote a sunset over the water? Would you airbrush a rose? That letter is the Mona Lisa of unselfconscious imbecility.
— Sign Popehat's Yearbook (@Popehat) November 15, 2017
Some on Twitter pointed out that Garmon had his law license suspended in the past.
He had his law license suspended in 2014 for being an ambulance-chasing liar trying to take advantage of the the family of a dead child. From "The Alabama Lawyer" Sept/14.. https://t.co/JozgTjprpD pic.twitter.com/jGyIAHV19N
— Brenda Of The North (@BrendaJeanCDN) November 15, 2017
Incredibly, Judge Roy Moore voted to uphold Garmon's disbarment, and then just a few years later decided to bring him on as his lawyer?
7. Garmon appealed his disbarment to the Alabama Supreme Court.
That is when then-Chief Justice Roy Moore voted to uphold Garmon's suspension
Even Roy Moore agreed his own lawyer's hearse chasing and religious lies to grieving parents was unethical.https://t.co/94WdL2e5NC pic.twitter.com/m31D6QMfQn
— Grant Stern (@grantstern) November 16, 2017
Since the letter came out, Garmon has also appeared on MSNBC where he started making completely nonsensical comments about one of the hosts he was talking to, Ali Velshi, implying that because Velshi was born in Kenya (though raised in Canada) he understood why dating teenagers may be considered appropriate in some cultures. Beyond making no sense at all in trying to somehow pull Velshi into this, the comment, at the very least, appears to imply that Judge Moore did the very things the other letter sort of claims may be false, and... that it might be okay because some other cultures think something else entirely is okay. Or something. None of it makes sense at all.
“Culturally speaking there’s differences. I looked up Ali’s background, and wow, that’s awesome that you have got such a diverse background, it’s really cool to read through that," attorney Trenton Garmon said when asked why Moore would need permission from girls' mothers to date them.
“What does Ali Velshi’s background have to do with dating children, 14-year-old girls?” co-host Stephanie Ruhle interjected.
Velshi was born in Kenya, raised in Canada and graduated from Queen’s University in Ontario.
“In other countries, there’s arrangement through parents for what we would refer to as consensual marriage,” Garmon said.
“Ali’s from Canada,” Ruhle said.
“Ali’s also spent time in other countries,” Garmon said. “So it’s not a bad thing.”
“I don’t know where you’re going with this, Trenton,” Velshi said.
I'm guessing that Alabama Media Group is not exactly worried. Indeed, it has responded succinctly:
Michelle Holmes, Vice President of Content for Alabama Media Group, responded Wednesday to the letter. "Roy Moore seeks election to the United States Senate. As such a public figure, he merits and can expect intense scrutiny by the electorate and the media on its behalf, including by Alabama Media Group, the state's largest media outlet."
"We stand behind our past reporting on Roy Moore, and vow to continue to doggedly pursue the truth on behalf of the people of Alabama. These threats will not silence us, and they will not slow us."
Of course, as some have pointed out, it's possible that Moore could file a lawsuit, just so he can claim that the articles about his actions are false... but then drop the case soon after the election next month (win or lose). That seems like a risky move and could backfire in all sorts of ways, but I don't think anyone's going to be arguing that Moore or Garmon are paragons of good decision making right now. Either way, this quickly runs up the rankings of the dumbest blustery legal threat letters we've seen -- and we've seen a lot.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: defamation, journalism, reporting, roy moore, threat letters, trenton garmon
Companies: alabama media group
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You innuendo but don't dare say that the allegations are true...
These allegations are not only weak after FOUR decades, but FAR from Weinstein -- not even denying -- the hiring of Mossad agents to offer McGowan (I think it is) a $60,000 fee just to get in private and record.
So until more is claimed and PROVEN, it must clearly be judged as ginned-up by Them.
Now, please try to find SOME topic which is tech and doesn't attack "conservatives" without evidence.
By the way, both Drudge Report and Infowars are now accused of being Russian outlets. HA, HA! You people are getting hilarious when desperate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You innuendo but don't dare say that the allegations are true...
Perhaps you missed the news ... selective hearing ... or worse maybe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You innuendo but don't dare say that the allegations are true...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You innuendo but don't dare say that the allegations are true...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You innuendo but don't dare say that the allegations are true...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You innuendo but don't dare say that the allegations are true...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You innuendo but don't dare say that the allegations are true...
I believe Weinstein's accusers.
I believe Trump's accusers.
I believe Franken's accuser(s).
I believe all of them because -- so far -- I can find no reason not to. I also believe them because the nature of their accounts is consistent with what we expect to hear from victims. And I believe them because it seems extremely unlikely that multiple women would decide to expose themselves to the kind of backlash they're getting (which is it's own horrible story) for any reason other than truth.
Incidentally, it's not "innuendo". These are on-the-record statements by the participants in the events.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You innuendo but don't dare say that the allegations are true...
hurrah for "guilty until proven innocent"
You are an idiot. Do not just trust someone because they claim they are a victim.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: You innuendo but don't dare say that the allegations are true...
As for Moore, Weinstein and Trump, each have multiple independent accusers many witnesses to their behavior, all giving a consistent story. In Trump's case - "grab her by the pussy" and walking in on teenage models while they were naked - proudly corroborated by Trump himself.
Grow up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You innuendo but don't dare say that the allegations are true...
Never mind. Let's just look at the fact that prior Republican elected officials and opponents also knew there was something up with this guy in the past. Current Senate conservatives have said they have a problem with him. He was also suspended because he can't manage to do his job. Beyond that, he's clearly a moron and i think we have a glut of those in Congress already. There, how is that for an attack?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You innuendo but don't dare say that the allegations are true...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You innuendo but don't dare say that the allegations are true...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
None of which excuses his actions, of course, and none of which should be the end of the matter. Nobody gets a pass on this stuff. Doesn't matter what party, age, color, politics, etc.: nobody gets a pass. Yes, it's painful when it's someone on "your team", whatever that happens to mean, but it's necessary.
That said, let's not lump all of this together. Harassment is not the same as sexual assault is not the same as a consensual affair is not the same as rape is not the same as any of the other things that could be listed in this sentence. It's important to distinguish these so that we don't devalue the more serious ones by equating them with the less serious ones.
For example, I'm furious with Franken for what he did. But it's NOT the same as Moore's serial pedophilia, sexual assault, and attempted rape. (I doubt we've heard from all of his victims. We never will hear from some of them.) It's also not the same as Weinstein's threats, spying, and intimidation. Nor is it the same as Trump's proclivity for underage girls (which I'm sure we will find out much more about once the Russians decide he's no longer a useful idiot). It is possible to be outraged about all of these men and their actions while simultaneously seeing distinctions between them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike, someone is spreading a rumor that you're an economist.
Glad to see you prove that charge false here by pretending to be a reporter, wallowing in the muck with this fake "news".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike, someone is spreading a rumor that you're an economist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike, someone is spreading a rumor that you're an economist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Mike, someone is spreading a rumor that you're an economist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike, someone is spreading a rumor that you're an economist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Mike, someone is spreading a rumor that you're an economist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike, someone is spreading a rumor that you're an economist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Consider:
On that basis, Trenton Garmon's opus seems firmly grounded in reality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Why would a Wookie live on Endor?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations? LIKE THIS:
http://govtslaves.info/2017/11/actress-with-dna-evidence-of-her-rape-at-golden-globes-mysteriou sly-fell-off-a-cliff-and-died/
Or images and exact details like with Franken now?
No? Well then, why make so much of this? -- Other than a "conservative" whom you fervently wish not elected?
Masnick is just taking cheap shots while ignoring Weinstein and today a former ally, Franken -- having made token notice of more likely charges.
By the way: it's difficult to refute allegations that come from out of the blue, that's why the letter is flailing. One doesn't know what the charge is or who one is fighting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations? LIKE THIS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations? LIKE THIS:
Oh, he's far sleazier than that.
The rape allegation he mentions wasn't against Weinstein, but against a member of the production crew.
He accuses Masnick of "ignoring Weinstein and Franken." This after Techdirt stories criticizing both. In the case of Franken, one just a couple hours earlier.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations? LIKE THIS:
Both the Rs and Ds are stupid little bitches full of the shit. You silly fucks both deserve each and every bit of whataboutism you sling at each other. Fucking hypocrites!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations? LIKE THIS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations? LIKE THIS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations? LIKE THIS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations? LIKE THIS:
Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations?
He could always sue. Then there's be discovery, and we would see who's the liar.
I'm sure the reason he hasn't sued is the same reason the orange retard isn't. Discovery will fuck him like a prison bitch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations? LIKE THIS:
Also, i think Putin's toll army is hiring and looking for advisors. You guys could teach them a thing or two.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations? LIKE THIS:
Okay, since I have your permission, what can I make out of this?
Justice Moore has incredibly bad judgement. I did not intend for the irony to be so explicit, yet there it is.
The local media in Alabama has failed to do their job. His political career should have never come this far.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations? LIKE THIS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations? LIKE THIS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations? LIKE THIS:
"One doesn't know what the charge is"? So far as I can tell, the charges are sexual assault and sexual advances on underage girls. He could simply say "I've never sexually assaulted anyone, nor have I ever made sexual advances towards any underage girls".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is there ANY evidence against Moore besides allegations? LIKE THIS:
I don't know about that; most of the allegations I've seen out of the blue make have seemed trivially easy to refute. (Some of them may have been so blatantly obvious as to basically refute themselves.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There's an old joke about a politician who could only lose an election if caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy. With the alt-right it's become reality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Man, I'm not even sure that would be enough. :(
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
this stuff comes out of one side of the mouth, while the other side of the mouth is spewing anti sharia law stuff
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let me explain the conspiracy for you
A ha! But don't fall for that trick, it's designed to distract you from the truth that the names are in fact "Mormon roentgen oratory", so you'll need to use Joseph Smith's special stones and an X-ray machine to expose the REAL truth behind this smokescreen.
Although Garmon's grammatical peccadilloes appear to be a cry for help, the lawyer is really saying "I'm best at litigating through interpretive dance, but like Men Without Hats, I'm really invoking POEtic license, and in the words of Edgar Allen, these tales of mystery and allegation shall be "Nevermore"!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No mention of any possible faked evidence
Signature in different ink color than rest of yearbook statement
Different handwriting
The number 7 is different in two places
Moore was never a DA, so wouldn’t have signed DA
Yearbook person claims she never saw Moore again, yet Moore years later was the judge at her divorce
And the Piece of Resistance
Gloria Allred her lawyer refuses to let an independent expert look at the yearbook to verify it is not fake.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That doesn't count and nothing else does either!
It's a good thing that's the only possible scrap of evidence against him then. And it's definitely a good thing he hasn't tried to defend himself in a phone interview, refused to give a hard 'no' to 'were you dating teenage girls?' and all but admitted his actions by stating that he never dated any girl 'without the permission of her mother'.
Seriously, what's it feel like to be defending someone that even fellow republicans are asking to step down because they believe the allegations against him?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]