DCP naming names again

[_sock puppet]

This DCP cat would be a friggin nightmare of a litigation client. He can't keep his trap shut.

slander and libel laws are, for good reason, very demanding, and, although I’m confident of my moral case, I’m not absolutely sure that such a complaint would prevail in court. It could, in other words, turn out to be an expensive and enormously draining waste of time. * * * Still, I probably won’t let this go on forever, nor even for a whole lot longer, without some sort of serious response. And, even if my Malevolent Stalker is still unknown (that is, even if he isn’t Jason Echols or a collective that includes that professor back east), his anonymity (and the complacent security of his aiders, disciples, and abettors) wouldn’t long survive the legal process of discovery.

I'm thinking these statements would, if I were defending Dr Scratch against such a scurrilous lawsuit (for which I would be honored to do), be very useful in support of a motion to dismiss and for an award of attorney fees. It seems from DCP's posting today that his consideration of litigation is to abuse the processes of discovery for the purpose of learning Dr Scratch's identity, so that he can focus his Mormon Inquisition on him, and may bring an action for that purpose, though he knows that he'd be barking in the wind when it comes to obtaining a judgment for damages.

[_Equality]

I wonder who the idiot lawyers are who advised him he has a good case for defamation against Scratch. I am guessing none of them would take the case on contingency. DCP seems unaware that truth is an absolute defense to defamation, or that for a statement to be defamatory it must be factual, not a statement of personal opinion or mere speculation. It would be interesting to see DCP's list of false factual statements by Scratch about DCP, resulting in harm to DCP's reputation, that DCP or his delusional lawyers think satisfy the legal elements of defamation.

I'd even be willing to bet DCP is a public figure, so he'd have to show reckless disregard for the truth.

Probably right. It's been a long time since Supreme Court has addressed the public figure issue. The biggest case on that was from 1974 (Gertz). Indeed, I wonder who ISN'T a public figure in this day and age.

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

DCP is having another meltdown of epic proportions.

Did he really just accuse Dr. Scratch of being a composite of Kishkumen and Chino Blanco? I personally know Dr. Scratch. Dr. Scratch is neither one of those people. Not even close.

Kishkumen and Chino Blanco are people whose in real life are well known. For DCP to sling false accusations regarding the in real life of Dr. Scratch shows me how low DCP has fallen in just a few short months.

He really is the Willy Loman of Mopologetics.

[_Kishkumen]

by the way: I wanted to add that the individual DCP identified as being his "stalker" seems like a charming and well-spoken chap. I hope that (if he hasn't done so already) he registers here and participates in the discussions. We might even be able to make room for him on the faculty at Cassius. Maybe even a brand-new chaired professorship.

I couldn't agree more, Doctor.

[_sock puppet]

He really is the Willy Loman of Mopologetics.

That comment only hurts DCP so much because it is true.

[_sock puppet]

DCP is having another meltdown of epic proportions.

Yes, and his blog postings today--more than a year, or two by his own typing, since posting here--betrays his claim that he is no longer interested in MDB and not reading posts here.

I guess you could say, DCP can leave MDB but he can't leave it alone.

[_Kishkumen]

DCP is having another meltdown of epic proportions.

Did he really just accuse Dr. Scratch of being a composite of Kishkumen and Chino Blanco? I personally know Dr. Scratch. Dr. Scratch is neither one of those people. Not even close.

Not being Doctor Scratch, it is difficult for me to imagine that anyone would confuse me for Doctor Scratch. But then we did see Ray Agostini spend weeks of his life absolutely convinced of it. No fact I could raise to disabuse him of the notion would work. The Doctor and I are both academics who are interested in the seedy demimonde of Mopologetics, but that is about where the similarity ends.

I do think it is interesting that Ray accused Jason here before Daniel accused him at Patheos. Was his post a trial balloon? Since the mods removed the name, Peterson thought he had caught his man?

[_sock puppet]

DCP is having another meltdown of epic proportions.

Did he really just accuse Dr. Scratch of being a composite of Kishkumen and Chino Blanco? I personally know Dr. Scratch. Dr. Scratch is neither one of those people. Not even close.

Not being Doctor Scratch, it is difficult for me to imagine that anyone would confuse me for Doctor Scratch. But then we did see Ray Agostini spend weeks of his life absolutely convinced of it. No fact I could raise to disabuse him of the notion would work. The Doctor and I are both academics who are interested in the seedy demimonde of Mopologetics, but that is about where the similarity ends.

I do think it is interesting that Ray accused Jason here before Daniel accused him at Patheos. Was his post a trial balloon? Since the mods removed the name, Peterson thought he had caught his man?

The Jason=Scratch notion was the oh-so-thinly-veiled implication of Pahoran's hints here at MDB about a month ago. Seems RayA, an Aussie, has been taking the lead from his kiwi comrade--and DCP took the bait too.

[_Kishkumen]

The Jason=Scratch notion was the oh-so-thinly-veiled implication of Pahoran's hints here at MDB about a month ago. Seems RayA, an Aussie, has been taking the lead from his kiwi comrade--and DCP took the bait too.

When I think of reliable detectives, Pahoran is the very last person who comes to mind. His theories are reliably wrong.

[_Equality]

by the way: I wanted to add that the individual DCP identified as being his "stalker" seems like a charming and well-spoken chap. I hope that (if he hasn't done so already) he registers here and participates in the discussions. We might even be able to make room for him on the faculty at Cassius. Maybe even a brand-new chaired professorship.

I couldn't agree more, Doctor.

Chino Blanco (Jason Echols) was a regular participant at Main Street Plaza, where (I believe) he is still an administrator, and in 2008 he did an incredible job blogging about the LDS Church's involvement in the Prop 8 campaign. He has largely moved on from blogging/posting about Mormon things as he is focusing on other things. He was never a very active participant in message boards like PostMo or FLAK, but would post links to his blogs at various discussion boards and blogs.

The idea that Chino Blanco was Scratch could have easily been disproven if DCP had undertaken even the most cursory of investigations. That DCP chose not to before hurling his accusation is further evidence of DCP's character. Indeed, he may be someone of such low character that should he (unwisely) choose to sue Scratch, as he has said he may be inclined to do, Scratch might be able to defeat such a suit by arguing that DCP is a "libel-proof plaintiff," i.e., one whose reputation generally is so low already that he can't suffer damages for loss of reputation caused by defamatory remarks. Someone like a Jerry Sandusky or O.J. Simpson would certainly be libel-proof plaintiffs. Whether DCP would be adjudged a libel-proof plaintiff is, of course, a legal question on which I am not opining; I am merely suggesting that it is a possible defense that anyone sued by DCP for defamation could consider asserting.