Legal Spring Logo

"Should I form an Incorporation or an LLC?"
Find out at LegalSpring.com
Reviewing Legal Services Online
 LEGAL SPRING
     


Google
 
=> Jew ADL Guilty of Defamation ! - must pay $10,000,000.00 damages !! - oh the irony! <=



"=> Vox Populi ©"
3/2/2004 11:01:15 AM


ADL must pay in Evergreen case
Denounced as anti-Semites, pair is owed millions
By Karen Abbott, Rocky Mountain News
March 2, 2004
The Anti-Defamation League must pay a former Evergreen couple it denounced as
anti-Semites more than $10 million, after the U.S. Supreme Court refused Monday
to review the lawsuit.
"This is the end of the case," said Bruce DeBoskey, director of the league's
Mountain States Region, which includes Colorado and Wyoming.
Denver attorney Jay Horowitz, who won the case for William and Dorothy "Dee"
Quigley, said the couple was "extraordinarily delighted" when he told them the
news Monday.
The widely publicized court battle drew friend-of-the-court briefs from a
variety of national advocacy organizations worried that the danger of huge legal
liabilities threatened their ability to work for good causes.
"There were 15 other human rights organizations that filed briefs in support of
our legal position," DeBoskey said.
The U.S. Supreme Court did not explain why it declined to review the case.
"We're all disappointed," DeBoskey said. "But as a practical matter, through the
entire process, we have continued to serve the community."
"We do remain committed to our fight against hatred and racism and bigotry and
extremism and anti-Semitism," he said.
The dispute that raged for nearly a decade through the federal courts began when
the Quigleys' dog fought with a dog owned by their Jewish neighbors, Mitchell
and Candice Aronson, in their upscale foothills neighborhood.
The Aronsons called the ADL in 1994, after overhearing the Quigleys' telephone
remarks on their Radio Shack police scanner. They said they heard the Quigleys
discuss a campaign to drive them from the neighborhood with Nazi scare tactics,
including tossing lampshades and soap on their lawn, putting pictures of
Holocaust ovens on their house and dousing one of their children with flammable
liquid.
The Aronsons were advised to record the conversations. Based on the recordings,
they sued the Quigleys in federal court, Jefferson County prosecutors charged
the Quigleys with hate crimes, and Saul Rosenthal, then the ADL's regional
director, denounced the Quigleys as anti-Semites in a news conference.
The Quigleys got death threats and hate mail.
Later, everyone found out that the recordings became illegal just five days
after they began, when President Clinton signed a new wiretap restriction into
federal law.
The hate charges were dropped, and Jefferson County paid the Quigleys $75,000
after prosecutors concluded Dee Quigley's remarks to a friend were only in jest.
Two lawyers on the ADL's volunteer board, who had advised the Aronsons, paid the
Quigleys $350,000 to settle a lawsuit.
The Quigleys and Aronsons dropped their legal attacks on one another, and
neither family paid the other anything. The Aronsons divorced. The Quigleys
moved to another state.
But a federal jury found in 2000, after a four-week trial before Denver U.S.
District Judge Edward Nottingham, that the Anti-Defamation League had defamed
the Quigleys. The jury awarded them $10.5 million.
The ADL appealed, and the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled
last year that the jury's award stood.
DeBoskey said the long legal proceedings allowed the ADL to set aside funds to
pay the judgment if necessary. Some the money will come from insurance and some
will come from other sources, including donors, but none will come from the
ADL's operating budget, DeBoskey said.
Horowitz estimated the judgment now totals more than $12.5 million, once
interest is included.
He said the Quigleys suffered greatly because they were branded as anti-Semites.
William Quigley's career in the motion picture industry was virtually destroyed,
Horowitz said.
"They cannot express how life-altering the ADL's actions have been," Horowitz
said.
The Quigleys' children were affected because "they grew up during some of the
most trying circumstances of this case," he said.
At one point, the family hired bodyguards. They received a box of dog feces in
the mail. Their own Catholic priest criticized them from the pulpit.
 
 
sptrap2000@yahoo.com (Quant)
3/2/2004 2:22:32 PM


"=> Vox Populi " <vox@popu.li> wrote in message news:<SZ31c.97$M85.24416@news.uswest.net>...
ADL must pay in Evergreen case
Denounced as anti-Semites, pair is owed millions
Read the article - they lost the case because of technical reasons.
They recorded the hate crimes, but later, everyone found out that the
recordings became illegal just five days after they began, when
President Clinton signed a new wiretap restriction into federal law.
By Karen Abbott, Rocky Mountain News
March 2, 2004
The Anti-Defamation League must pay a former Evergreen couple it denounced as
anti-Semites more than $10 million, after the U.S. Supreme Court refused Monday
to review the lawsuit.
"This is the end of the case," said Bruce DeBoskey, director of the league's
Mountain States Region, which includes Colorado and Wyoming.
Denver attorney Jay Horowitz, who won the case for William and Dorothy "Dee"
Quigley, said the couple was "extraordinarily delighted" when he told them the
news Monday.
The widely publicized court battle drew friend-of-the-court briefs from a
variety of national advocacy organizations worried that the danger of huge legal
liabilities threatened their ability to work for good causes.
"There were 15 other human rights organizations that filed briefs in support of
our legal position," DeBoskey said.
The U.S. Supreme Court did not explain why it declined to review the case.
"We're all disappointed," DeBoskey said. "But as a practical matter, through the
entire process, we have continued to serve the community."
"We do remain committed to our fight against hatred and racism and bigotry and
extremism and anti-Semitism," he said.
The dispute that raged for nearly a decade through the federal courts began when
the Quigleys' dog fought with a dog owned by their Jewish neighbors, Mitchell
and Candice Aronson, in their upscale foothills neighborhood.
The Aronsons called the ADL in 1994, after overhearing the Quigleys' telephone
remarks on their Radio Shack police scanner. They said they heard the Quigleys
discuss a campaign to drive them from the neighborhood with Nazi scare tactics,
including tossing lampshades and soap on their lawn, putting pictures of
Holocaust ovens on their house and dousing one of their children with flammable
liquid.
The Aronsons were advised to record the conversations. Based on the recordings,
they sued the Quigleys in federal court, Jefferson County prosecutors charged
the Quigleys with hate crimes, and Saul Rosenthal, then the ADL's regional
director, denounced the Quigleys as anti-Semites in a news conference.
The Quigleys got death threats and hate mail.
Later, everyone found out that the recordings became illegal just five days
after they began, when President Clinton signed a new wiretap restriction into
federal law.
The hate charges were dropped, and Jefferson County paid the Quigleys $75,000
after prosecutors concluded Dee Quigley's remarks to a friend were only in jest.
Two lawyers on the ADL's volunteer board, who had advised the Aronsons, paid the
Quigleys $350,000 to settle a lawsuit.
The Quigleys and Aronsons dropped their legal attacks on one another, and
neither family paid the other anything. The Aronsons divorced. The Quigleys
moved to another state.
But a federal jury found in 2000, after a four-week trial before Denver U.S.
District Judge Edward Nottingham, that the Anti-Defamation League had defamed
the Quigleys. The jury awarded them $10.5 million.
The ADL appealed, and the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled
last year that the jury's award stood.
DeBoskey said the long legal proceedings allowed the ADL to set aside funds to
pay the judgment if necessary. Some the money will come from insurance and some
will come from other sources, including donors, but none will come from the
ADL's operating budget, DeBoskey said.
Horowitz estimated the judgment now totals more than $12.5 million, once
interest is included.
He said the Quigleys suffered greatly because they were branded as anti-Semites.
William Quigley's career in the motion picture industry was virtually destroyed,
Horowitz said.
"They cannot express how life-altering the ADL's actions have been," Horowitz
said.
The Quigleys' children were affected because "they grew up during some of the
most trying circumstances of this case," he said.
At one point, the family hired bodyguards. They received a box of dog feces in
the mail. Their own Catholic priest criticized them from the pulpit.
 
 
"=> Vox Populi ©"
3/2/2004 4:26:16 PM


Quant wrote:


"=> Vox Populi " <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
news:<SZ31c.97$M85.24416@news.uswest.net>...

Read the article - they lost the case because of technical reasons.
They recorded the hate crimes,
Wrong again liar. There were no "crimes" committed.
but later, everyone found out that the
recordings became illegal just five days after they began, when
President Clinton signed a new wiretap restriction into federal law.
There was no crime, hate or otherwise you scumbag.
 
 
yp11
3/2/2004 7:25:40 PM


It looks like Jews are having trouble controlling the American
judiciary. That's a very good sign for the future of America.
On Tue, 2 Mar 2004 11:01:15 -0700, "=> Vox Populi " <vox@popu.li>
wrote:
ADL must pay in Evergreen case
Denounced as anti-Semites, pair is owed millions
By Karen Abbott, Rocky Mountain News
March 2, 2004
The Anti-Defamation League must pay a former Evergreen couple it denounced as
anti-Semites more than $10 million, after the U.S. Supreme Court refused Monday
to review the lawsuit.
"This is the end of the case," said Bruce DeBoskey, director of the league's
Mountain States Region, which includes Colorado and Wyoming.
Denver attorney Jay Horowitz, who won the case for William and Dorothy "Dee"
Quigley, said the couple was "extraordinarily delighted" when he told them the
news Monday.
The widely publicized court battle drew friend-of-the-court briefs from a
variety of national advocacy organizations worried that the danger of huge legal
liabilities threatened their ability to work for good causes.
"There were 15 other human rights organizations that filed briefs in support of
our legal position," DeBoskey said.
The U.S. Supreme Court did not explain why it declined to review the case.
"We're all disappointed," DeBoskey said. "But as a practical matter, through the
entire process, we have continued to serve the community."
"We do remain committed to our fight against hatred and racism and bigotry and
extremism and anti-Semitism," he said.
The dispute that raged for nearly a decade through the federal courts began when
the Quigleys' dog fought with a dog owned by their Jewish neighbors, Mitchell
and Candice Aronson, in their upscale foothills neighborhood.
The Aronsons called the ADL in 1994, after overhearing the Quigleys' telephone
remarks on their Radio Shack police scanner. They said they heard the Quigleys
discuss a campaign to drive them from the neighborhood with Nazi scare tactics,
including tossing lampshades and soap on their lawn, putting pictures of
Holocaust ovens on their house and dousing one of their children with flammable
liquid.
The Aronsons were advised to record the conversations. Based on the recordings,
they sued the Quigleys in federal court, Jefferson County prosecutors charged
the Quigleys with hate crimes, and Saul Rosenthal, then the ADL's regional
director, denounced the Quigleys as anti-Semites in a news conference.
The Quigleys got death threats and hate mail.
Later, everyone found out that the recordings became illegal just five days
after they began, when President Clinton signed a new wiretap restriction into
federal law.
The hate charges were dropped, and Jefferson County paid the Quigleys $75,000
after prosecutors concluded Dee Quigley's remarks to a friend were only in jest.
Two lawyers on the ADL's volunteer board, who had advised the Aronsons, paid the
Quigleys $350,000 to settle a lawsuit.
The Quigleys and Aronsons dropped their legal attacks on one another, and
neither family paid the other anything. The Aronsons divorced. The Quigleys
moved to another state.
But a federal jury found in 2000, after a four-week trial before Denver U.S.
District Judge Edward Nottingham, that the Anti-Defamation League had defamed
the Quigleys. The jury awarded them $10.5 million.
The ADL appealed, and the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled
last year that the jury's award stood.
DeBoskey said the long legal proceedings allowed the ADL to set aside funds to
pay the judgment if necessary. Some the money will come from insurance and some
will come from other sources, including donors, but none will come from the
ADL's operating budget, DeBoskey said.
Horowitz estimated the judgment now totals more than $12.5 million, once
interest is included.
He said the Quigleys suffered greatly because they were branded as anti-Semites.
William Quigley's career in the motion picture industry was virtually destroyed,
Horowitz said.
"They cannot express how life-altering the ADL's actions have been," Horowitz
said.
The Quigleys' children were affected because "they grew up during some of the
most trying circumstances of this case," he said.
At one point, the family hired bodyguards. They received a box of dog feces in
the mail. Their own Catholic priest criticized them from the pulpit.
 
 
Ed Cogburn
3/4/2004 6:16:19 AM


=> Vox Populi wrote:
Quant wrote:
Wrong again liar. There were no "crimes" committed.
Yes there was, unfortunately, the *taping* of those crimes, the proof they
occurred, was ruled inadmissible, thus there was insufficient "evidence" to
legally prove the crime happened. Legally. Had the tapes been allowed in
court, they would have been found guilty, i.e., they got off on a
technicality. Common sense therefore says they are guilty as hell, just as
guilty as you are clueless.
 
 
"=> Vox Populi ©"
3/4/2004 8:33:21 AM


Ed Cogburn wrote:
=> Vox Populi wrote:
Yes there was, unfortunately, the *taping* of those crimes, the proof
they occurred, was ruled inadmissible,
Even with the tapes, there were no "crimes" much less whatever
the @$#* you whiners claim are "hate crimes".
Care to cite an applicable statute in Colorado that shows otherwise?
thus there was insufficient
"evidence" to legally prove the crime happened.
Yes, even with the tapes.
Legally. Had the
tapes been allowed in court, they would have been found guilty, i.e.,
You're lying again, whiner.
they got off on a technicality. Common sense therefore says they are
guilty as hell, just as guilty as you are clueless.
Well since you lack any common sense, here's a clue - Hate is Not a Crime ...
at least not in the U$$A. The day you can outlaw thought/emotion is the day
I can @$#* you mother in the ass.
Any questions?
PS: I "hate" you.
 
 
"Iskandar Baharuddin"
3/4/2004 11:36:40 PM




"=> Vox Populi " <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
news:a%H1c.635$Zl5.14769@news.uswest.net...

| Ed Cogburn wrote:
| > => Vox Populi wrote:
| >> Quant wrote:
| >>
| >>> Read the article - they lost the case because of
technical reasons.
| >>> They recorded the hate crimes,
| >>
| >> Wrong again liar. There were no "crimes" committed.
| >
| >
| > Yes there was, unfortunately, the *taping* of those
crimes, the proof
| > they occurred, was ruled inadmissible,
|| Even with the tapes, there were no "crimes" much less
whatever
| the @$#* you whiners claim are "hate crimes".
|| Care to cite an applicable statute in Colorado that shows
otherwise?
||| > thus there was insufficient
| > "evidence" to legally prove the crime happened.
|| Yes, even with the tapes.
|| > Legally. Had the
| > tapes been allowed in court, they would have been found
guilty, i.e.,
|| You're lying again, whiner.
|| > they got off on a technicality. Common sense therefore
says they are
| > guilty as hell, just as guilty as you are clueless.
If fishes were horses then beggars could fly. Or something
like that, it's just a technicality.
Izzy
|| Well since you lack any common sense, here's a clue - Hate
is Not a Crime ...
| at least not in the U$$A. The day you can outlaw
thought/emotion is the day
| I can @$#* you mother in the ass.
|| Any questions?
||| PS: I "hate" you.
|||||
 
 
Ed Cogburn
3/5/2004 11:18:30 AM


=> Vox Populi wrote:
PS: I "hate" you.
Thank you, I sure as hell wouldn't want you to like me, considering what kind
of pseudo-homo-sapien I'd have to be to earn your admiration.
 
 
Report this post for offensive content


site map |  disclaimer |  privacy
All Rights Reserved, Legal Spring, Inc. 2004