 |
| Dr. Mann |
The first post in this series focused on a lawsuit by climate scientists in a federal court in the state of Oregon.
They had broken through the first obstacles thrown at them by climate change deniers in cahoots with the Obama Administration.
At some coming phase, they will have to face the Trumposphere denialism, in a sicker, less kind, nation.
II. Foreground
In today's post, I want to talk about another lawsuit brought by another climate scientist that was not brought in a federal court, but rather was filed in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia (Complaint).
That libel complaint was filed by plaintiff Dr. Michael Mann against defendants The National Review, Inc., The Competitive Enterprise Institute, bloggers Rand Simberg and Mark Steyn.
Oh how, when served with the complaint, they scorned the case at The Lettuce & Bacon Talk (BLT) and The Volkswagen Conspiracy blogs (VW I, VW II).
The defendants, evidently encouraged by the blogging bloviators' refusal to retract their libelous writings, moved to dismiss the complaint as an infringement of their First Amendment rights.
They evidently do not understand that, outside the Trumposphere, the First Amendment does not protect low energy brain waves that take the form of libel or slander.
Nor do they appear to understand that, as a matter of law and fact, global warming induced climate change is not a hoax ... it is serious as a lawsuit (Global Warming Induced Climate Change Is A Matter of Law).
III. Reality Cookies For Kookies
When the appellate court ruled yesterday, it said that Dr. Mann can take his case to the jury:
Dr. Mann has supplied sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find, by a preponderance of the evidence, that statements in the articles written by Mr. Simberg and Mr. Steyn were false, defamatory, and published by appellants to third parties, and, by clear and convincing evidence, that appellants did so with actual malice. We, therefore, affirm the trial court’s denial of the special motions to dismiss the defamation claims based on those articles and remand the case for additional proceedings in the trial court with respect to these claims.(Appellate Court Decision, p. 105). First will be the discovery phase of the litigation, which will bring their libelous brain waves into the under oath zone, which changes one's countenance.
IV. Conclusion
Congratulations to Dr. Mann and his competent lawyers, and may the jury sock it to the bloviating climate change deniers !
Their Agnotology work is a shame on humanity (Agnotology: The Surge, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17).
The previous post in this series is here.
"First will be the discovery phase of the litigation", That's what it is all about. Dr. Mann's claims of the hockey stick are on very shaky grounds. We shall see what "discovery" brings forth.
ReplyDeleteLike with Trump when he is under oath, it brings up a less cocky defendant.
DeleteOtherwise it can bring forth perjury and jail for them.
Their lies will have to go.
The science is quite sound as are the facts against them.
No refuge in the First Amendment for scoundrels, it is made for good citizens who do not become ad hominem first, then look for facts later.