Keep in mind these people were found not guilty.

Publishing untrue statements intended to harm another persons reputation is libel.

Why shouldn't the people who did that be held accountable?

When you post are you willing to stand behind what you post?

A Texas court has ask a service provider to identify posters who commented on a public matter in this case the dependents in a criminal trial.

How would you feel if your information was revealed? Do you say things with a poster name you wouldn't say otherwise? If you had to post under your true name would you post differently?

How do you feel about this?

Hundreds who posted views on sex assault trial targeted in Tarrant suit

04:39 PM CST on Saturday, February 7, 2009

By CHRIS HAWES / WFAA--TV

FORT WORTH — Hundreds of people who posted their opinions of a sexual assault trial in an online forum are now the targets of a lawsuit.

The authors of those comments on a Web site thought they were anonymous, but this week, a judge ruled their names should be revealed.

Mark and Rhonda Lesher lived quietly in northeast Texas; Mark practiced law, Rhonda ran a beauty salon.

Then, last year, a woman accused the couple — along with another man — of sexually assaulting her. That's when the anonymous comments started appearing on Topix.com.

An estimated 1,700 statements were too graphic to be included in this story, going far beyond the criminal charges.

"They were perverted, sick, vile, inhumane accusations," said Mark Lesher in a telephone interview from Clarksville, Texas.

The Leshers' attorney, William Pieratt Demond, labeled the comments "a form of persecution."

Last month, the couple got their day in court. A jury found the Leshers, along with their alleged accomplice, not guilty. But in the online forum, it seemed, the trial had no end.

"It just ... basically made us both feel like common criminals," Lesher said. "It's like someone had basically raped us of our reputation and our standing in the community over and over and over again."

And so this month, the Leshers sued 178 anonymous posters on the Web site. A Tarrant County judge ordered Topix to turn over potentially identifying information about the users listed in the lawsuit.. The site has until March 6 to comply with the ruling.

"We do not just give up people's privacy," said the Web site's CEO Chris Tolles. "We're very, very careful about that."

But Tolles said the discussions are not necessarily a license to run people through the mud. "If there is a line that's been crossed from a libel standpoint — and it seems reasonable — we do, in fact, cooperate with the courts."

This lawsuit was brought in Tarrant County because it appears at least one anonymous poster lives here.

Internet libel suits have had success in the past. A few years ago a North Dakota professor was awarded $3 million over claims a student Web site defamed him.

E-mail chawes@wfaa.com

haha

More of the same.

I just love comparative guilt.

Poor Phelps...several things here I think are funny. Phelps kept his endorsements when he drank like a fish, got stopped and sentenced to probation DUI and dated a stripper. After all drinking like a fish, DUI and dating strippers is what a red blooded American boy is suppose to do right?

Then a picture surfaces of him hitting a bong.

People lose their minds?!?

Seriously the guy hit a bong? How many gold metals did he win?

The funny part is that if anyone was being truthful here they'd have to admit he hit a bong and still excelled.

On a non-serious note can you imagine this guys lung capacity? Bet he cleared that bong easily.

Scariest words in the English Language:

"I'm from the government and I'm here to help."

Damn I am tired of people who's standard reply goes along the standard line of, "oh yeah well what about so-n-so"

Like that stunning simple Hassalbeck on the view who in reply to the issue of hunting wolves from airplanes in Alaska comes back with "What about abortion?" Don't like the conversation? Attempt to change it, point fingers at others and go to the "oh yeah what about" arguments.

Some posters here still fall back on "well what about Clinton getting a bj...he should have been prosecuted" line on tons of threads.


It is not the fault of the media when people on both sides of the isle and all those in between chose to purchase and support a bunch of partisan loud mouthed pundits telling us what we should think of current events rather than seeking out facts.

The evil media is serving up what we order.

Pundits who indulge our own views, prejudices and insecurities by telling us what we want to hear.

Who's fault?

OUR FAULT

I too came from a poor family, and they didn't get help way back them. Would I have b$tched if they had gotten help? Only if I had no bloody heart.

My Dad's family was very uneducated and lived a very different life then we live today..and I belive that if you asked your parents or grand parents, they would have scoffed at taking charity from anyone..at least thats what mine would have said.. After becoming an adult, he worked two to three jobs at a time to provide for his family, people now days don't even want to work one job much less 2 or more...and I do understand that there are many people that do work more then one job, I am not talking about those people..Heart has nothing to do with it.

Too bad your fathers family did not have our system today that would have prevented them from starving to death. How proud they would be of you right now, knowing how you think.

Here again is someone talking out of their butt and stating or should I say mistating things about me they do not know.. My father was very proud of my continuing his charitable causes, and when he passed away, had never taken a dime from any govenment agency for charity. And yes, they would be proud that I continue to provide real assistance to people that really want to improve their lives..

You seem to miss the point of our system, that cares for it's people when things are bad for them individually and as a whole.

Yes, I am very familiar with Carl Marx and his theory of "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."
But you and I disagree with the fundimental philosophy behind it. I believe that individuals should give to help others, I do not beleive that it is the responsiblity of the government to take from people to give to whom they choose..The pie in the sky attidute is a nice thought, but it is not reality and that system cannot maintain itself and eventually falls...show me one Marxist country that flourishes and I may change my opinion.



Not everyone that is facing hard times right now did something to deserve it. Yet you would expect them to suffer... that amazes me.

So what did these people do during the good times to prepare for the bad times??? Did they educate themselves, did they save their money?? Did they get themselves out of debt so they could survive the hard times?? Probably not, because most people live day to day and people have not really fallen on super hard times,and do not have the self discipline to live within their means. There are exceptions to that, I do understand that, and as I have stated, helping someone through a hard time is good, I have an issue with people living off that system though.

I have some rental units that I started buying right out of college..most are now paid off and provide a good income for helping others. What happens when one of my renters runs into hard time..I help them buy allowing them to live there and not pay rent..till they get back on their feet and get a job. But me being the heartless and cruel person puts my belief into action...not just words. And I do it with my money and assets, not anyone elses..

Should I be burdened? Well I would not call it a burden as you would. I accept it as a reality of life. I would accept it, if for no other reason, then that one day I too may find myself in their shoes, and would hope there would be someone that cared that I didn't starve to death.

The reality is that if you plan right and live within your means, have the self disipline to save and not go into debt, then living through the hard times is easier.. Nothing is easy in life,it requires sacrifice and nothing is free, but being accountable for ones self and providing a way for themselves is not a selfish act. To me those that expect the government and indirectly me and other tax payers to provide for them is selfish act..

I don't want to live in a selfish world.

Well I can tell that you are not business sauvey. Administrative costs are a part of each and every business from small to large. All charities have administrative costs which they have to consider to accomplish their charitible works.

The government being an unaffiliated organization, in other words a non discriminatory source, they are qualified to disperse to the needy what they need far better than say a religious organization that will want to cater to their own, or white folks that would want to cater to their own, or a party affiliation that would only want to cater to their own, or any group that discriminates against others for ANY REASON that would want to cater to who they FEEL is deserving, etc.... I used those as examples to show how people can be discriminatory and feel they are right with their form of discrimination when in truth they are not.

I worked for the welfare department and unbeknowst to most people the welfare department actually recoups their money in quite a few ways that people outside would not know. Child support is used to repay welfare received by women or men, repayment of welfare received incorrectly is another way of recouping.

I don't know if you know this but prejudice people really scream alot about the government handouts as a way of "legitimizing" their personal prejudices against whoever they are prejudice against. If a person who hears this regularly from those around them really looks at the base of the reason they are screaming about it, they will find that the people are actually prejudice against the "type" of people they feel are riding for free. Check it out sometime.

I assume that you can read, and that, if you want to know something, you can go to my profile, same as I go to yours.

But Obama as a new president needs to know about the circumstances of people, how else can he cater for their needs?

Now, the way it was the past 8 years was, the rich got richer, the poor got even more poor.
Didn't mean though that the rich spent all their money in the US, no, they most likely transferred it to places where it wouldn't be taxed as hard.
Obama is trying to give money to those people who actually have to spend it in the US because they have no other choice, therefore putting it back into the economy.
It will take years on end to get back to where you have been in previous times, but every little helps.

Unfortunately we lost the option of that a few years ago. Esp last Mar when Congress refused to do something about all the homeowners losing their homes.

Now we are left with the ONLY option, The one Obama has presented, and passing it will be the RIGHT THING!