Thursday, 7 October 2010

Even more love letters from Alan


26 comments:

Mr Inbetween said...

Love letter usully are a welcome interlude but not of this type. If you are serious about retaining your Unit and Blog I suggest you instruct a legal firm otherwise Mr Blake will have your Blog to run his campaign in the 2012 election.
Its time to take stock, take advice and assess your options before its too late as the Australian legal system favours the Plaintiff unless you put in a counter claim, the Defenendant is always playing catch up.

Hans Van Veluwen said...

Dear Mr Blake...please don't be the one to compromise our rights to free speech in Australia. Will make a mockery of all those that fought and sacrificed for the right to free speech in our country...what ever happened to our country that things would go this way? Lighten up and build a bridge...give us some faith in a fair go.

Osho said...

The allegations are frivolous and fnq didn't tell blake he'll get bugger all.

Ya didn't murder him and obviously critism comes part and parcel with his job. He chose the job not you. With weak health he should not have taken office as critism comes with the job. etc etc.......

Gather copies of blogs that show politicians get called names routinely.

There's many mitigating circumstances that make his application puerile. Start writing them down. You sir have work to do.

Gather many references. The references must include they are for a court case.

Probably have to print an apology.....big deal.

tony.laing said...

Mike, I read on the second letter that the application is to be served on one Michael Moore of YORKNEYS KNOB QLD. Never heard of that suburb.

Jannie Ferguson, Canopy's Edge, Smithfield said...

Good spotting Tony!!!! I saw that as well

I guess u get what you pay for..... Nameless Lawyers Inc!!!!!

No Blake lover said...

There seems to be some confusion here as to what Blake is actually accusing Mike of.

Criticism is not a reason to allege defamation, and would be thrown out of court.

What exactly is it that Blake is claiming to have defamed him?

He will have to be specific when it gets to court.

Was it to do with the use of his council phone for personal business?

He'd never win that one, so I can't see it being the trigger.

Elizabeth Cranley, University of Queensland said...

Dear Mr Moore, we are following your case in our journalism law and ethics subject. Good luck.

Smithfield Sam said...

Mocking legal documents as 'love letters', and joking about the spelling, is only getting you closer to losing your home, Mr. Moore. Have a good laugh while you can. Clearly you've failed to drum up any interest for you personally, nor for the concept of defamatory blogs being "free speech". And of course you realise that the concept of "free speech" is an American constitutional issue, and has little bearing on Australia.

Osho said...

Smithfield Sam will go for stalking. No limitation of time there.

Take this one to the police. His malice is intense!

kate said...

I do think the way MM is using Cairns Blog to demonstrate the progression of a legal case in this way is so very powerful, empowering and illuminating. Could lead to a whole new way as to how communities deal with legal threats in future.

e.g. embarrass all those solicitors who like to write letters based on baseless legal actions just to scare away dissenters.

Amazing stuff. Thanks, MM.

No Blake lover said...

Come on Mike, tell us what it is exactly Blake is suing you for?

You must know, they are obliged to give you details before this reaches court.

Michael P Moore said...

Read the Statement of Claim, that is linked at the bottom of this Blog post...

No Blake lover said...

OK Mike, I read that, and I'd say you were in deep shit.

My advice would be to engage legal assistance, even if you can't afford it, either that or sign over everything you own to a family member before a caveat is placed on it.

I see you are also being sued for what others have posted, I've warned you before that you're responsible for what you allow on your blog, whoever writes it.

You stepped over the mark, big time Mike, you should have stuck to facts, how the hell did you think you would get away with that?

If you cannot go to court with representation I suggest you post a full and comprehensive apology, and unequivocally withdraw all accusations.

This probably won't wash with Blake, but could help you in court.

muggles said...

Very much looking forward to attending Court on the 29th. Have arranged for a day off work.

Shame you can't sell tickets to this show, MM.

(Umm... My "word verification" for this comment was APOLOGY).

Michael P Moore said...

"No Blake Lover" - you obviously haven't been following this for long. If you read my defence, you will learn the full story about this case, and that everything I have published - under my name - I believe to be true.

gallbally said...

Have all of you considerd blake may just be a liar ?

No Blake lover said...

Mike, you can believe what you like, that is no defence. Can you prove it?

Will those councillors who gave you information turn up in court in your defence?

Will they stand up in court and call Blake a pathological liar?

Can you prove he was complicit in a secret deal over 'cash for comments'?

Do you have witnesses from the LNP to say they don't want to renew his membership?

You may prove he wrote to your employer, but can you prove he did the same to others?

And it goes on and on, each accusation has to be proved, until then they are unproven and therefore untrue.

I wish you well, but I'm glad I'm not in your shoes.

Friend said...

Michael ... you and I know how you fabricated evidence to defame Blake.
Yes that's right - fabricated.
Nothing to do with free speech.
You're history.
Oh well ... back to NZ you go.
Go now quickly before Blake quarantines your passport.
He's probably put a caveat to stop you selling your apartment.
Go go go quickly ... fuck off !!!
Loser

Bryan Law said...

The material complained of by councillor Blake consists of:

two opinions published by Michael moore on a blog.

two comments published on his blog by commenters, on unspecified threads.

Many here believe that because some of what Mike said was actually defamatory, that he has no chance of winning.

It doesn't matter so much whether Michael published defamatory material - it's about whether he can avail himself of one of the many defences.

I believe that he can. I believe he can present a solid defence that will see off Councillor Blake's suit - and serve to illuminate the jury, the judiciary, and the general public about the actual exercise of free cyber speech at the beginning of the 21st Century.

Jude Johnston said...

FNQ Legal looks like it is one of those "do it yourself jobs". You know like the "debt collection letters" or "Make your Own Will Kit" You buy the "kit" which includes the standard letters (on their letterhead) and you print out 3 copies, 1 you send out, 1 you keep and 1 you forward to the collection agency (legal firm). After the due date, the firm contacts you and asks you if you want to proceed to the next step ie legal action.
That letter was not produced by any professional.

No Blake lover said...

@ Brian Law

The accusations amount to a lot more than two opinions.

Claiming he was involved in a cover-up, for instance, is not an opinion, it's an accusation, one that has to be proven.

Comments by contributors are the responsibility of the blog owner.

Perhaps you'd care to outline a winnable defence?

Exactly what is this 'free cyber speech' of which you talk?

Can you supply a link outlining ones 'right' to freedom of cyber speech, or freedom of speech of any flavour?

You need to come down from la-la-land and join the real world.

A full apology and retraction should be forthcoming before the trial, this could sway the judge when deciding the compensation payable.

MG said...

I am with you No BLake Lover

Mike you think this is a game and you have not sat back at any time and researched like I did your role and responsibilities as an owner/operator of a blog and the legal ramifications of such.

Free Speech was never meant as a slogging speech if so that is what it would be so named.

You would be wise to read the fine print of blogger and facebook as well as the criminal code for a service carriage/device.

MG

Tony S, Freshwater said...

"Friend"... you say this blog has "fabricated evidence to defame Blake...."

easy to say. You obviously are a close mate of Blake's so here's your chance ... what was said to defame Blake?? what??

Paul Taylor, Childers said...

MG - what on earth has your augment got to do with Facebook??!!! you keep bringing it up and you are living in some parallel universe.

MG said...

Paul

by the sound of it you have not used facebook...if you did michael moore has linked this site through his personal page on facebook.

I see that unless you are very technology savvy and have not bothered to read the links I posted previously.

plus the carriage service here is two fold with two jurisdictions...australian and american

if you do not understand then I suggest you read the posts I made and you will have some understanding

happy reading its lengthy time consuming and you will need to understand policies of internet use

cheers

Missy said...

Hi ho, hi ho back to New Zealand you go..