Sunday, October 11, 2009

Surprised It Took As Long As It Did

But somebody finally decided to share over at USASG.

It's always fun matching wits with people who watch too many Law and Order reruns.

At what point is providing the police with tag numbers for tersely worded "Dear John" letters illegal?

Probably around the same point that providing them with information on who's dealing drugs, sucking cock for money, and lighting houses on fire is (hint: never).

I know that the street is a public place so he can take the pictures,

I'd say give that man a cigar, but he'd probably stick it Clinton-style in Danielle's rotten cooter and get oral gonasyphaherpelesamydia.

but to involve the police (for this letter home to strike fear, it'd have to be coming from Vice or mention prostitution, no?) seems a bit...libelous?

Another hint: to demonstrate libel, you'd have to demonstrate a statement is made about a PERSON with malicious intent that the speaker KNOWS to be false and says anyway and that it causes some sort of public, irreparable harm. Truth is an absolute defense to slander and libel claims, and statements of opinion and statements made in good faith (ie, we thought it was true at the time) are per se immune to defamation claims. Seeing as we're simply giving tag numbers over to police and not identifying anyone by've got no standing to sue bub. Your tag number isn't a person and has no standing to sue for libel. It can't be defamed or slandered. It's simply a piece of information collected by the police in the routine investigation of a crime. You should speak to a lawyer about this...we sure did!

But by all means, bring it. I'd happily spring for a few hundred bucks for a lawyer to meet you on Calvert Street so you can go on the record and explain to the court that you were picking up known prostitutes like Fat Donna or Jodie or Danielle or Suzy to take them to the orthodontist. My defense would be simple--I'd just have to post a picture of the three or four scum covered jagged, orange teeth they've got left so we could see that's not happening. Seeing as it was your car and not you that was given over to the BPD, I'd love to see you explain to the judge how you have standing to sue. "Your honor, my 1998 Ford Explorer was defamed by PJW's calumny! It's an outrage! The poor vehicle hasn't been the same". Seriously, I'm itching for somebody with the temerity to waste the court's time explaining how giving the BPD a tag number is defamatory.

On the record. In a public forum. Where your information, your address, the nature of your suit, and that it involves a known prostitute will be available for all to see in Maryland Case Search, which we can also share with the news media and our readership here. And your wife, who thought you were making Lowe's or Blockbuster runs all those times you rolled out after dinner.

Please. I'm dying for the opportunity to share your story with the world! It'll be a high old time. A real knee slapper. And great publicity for this site, for USASG, and for the BPD Neighborhood Services Unit.

Or you could just go pick up your snaggle toothed $20 beejays elsewhere.


  1. I'd also like to have one of these Johns file a lawsuit. It would give us a good reason to file a "John Doe" lawsuit against USA Sex Guide for the online identities of local mongers.

  2. Yup! Kids, today's word is "motion for discovery"! I'm sure the admins at USASG would love that. If you guys don't like the notoriety you're getting now, wait until one of you knuckleheads opens pandora's box.

    In a city clocking 300 murders a year, you can rest assured judges aren't going to be amused by people wasting the court's time in such a fashion. It would be rather fetching to have our day in court explaining PJW and getting to listen to the johns explain their actions.

    This I gotta see. Come on Perry Mason, bring it!