Blogoshpere Rallies Behind Kathleen Seidel, Against Subpoena

Page 1 of 2 [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

dkmnow
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 30

05 Apr 2008, 6:31 am

I'm surprised -- it seems this hasn't been covered here.

Kathleen Seidel, creator of neurodiversity.com, has been "SLAPPed" with a bogus subpoena by dirtbag anti-vax lawyer Clifford J. Shoemaker. The demands in the subpoena include all personal and financial documents pertaining in any way to her website, as well as all electronic correspondence and documentation pertaining to over a hundred other bloggers and websites -- simply because their links appeared in the side-bar of her weblog. The demands in the subpoena include brazen violations of constitutional protections concerning privacy, freedom of association, and even freedom of religion.

Kathleen has drafted and submitted an outstanding motion to quash the subpoena, but the decision of the court may not be known for some time.

http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/article/150/

Meanwhile, countless bloggers in the autistic self-advocacy, neurodiversity, and disability rights communities -- and even in legal and medical circles -- are rallying around Kathleen and condemning Shoemaker and his clients for their blatant attempt to USE Kathleen in a bid to intimidate and silence their critics. Several bloggers are even compiling running lists of posts made by bloggers all over the web expressing their support for Kathleen, and their outrage at Shoemaker's abuse of power.

Several dozen such posts are linked to from these:

I Speak of Dreams
The Voyage
Natural Variation
Holford Watch

Some of my own observations and opinions on this matter can be fount at:
Shoemaker's Witch-Hunt: An Open Letter

Please show your support and help protect our civil and human rights by blogging about this outrage. Thanks.

...

Gawd, I hate this posting interface.



The_Cucumber
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 665

05 Apr 2008, 7:10 am

Wow....

From what I've read it looks like it was possibly incurred by an inability to understand that the entire public will not necessarily take their side in this issue. Which is a simple matter of incompetence and lack of prior knowledge of the issue at best.


At worst it's of course an intentional attempt to prevent people from making statements critical of their case, which is a blatant violation of first amendment rights.



agmoie
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2005
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 363
Location: Britain

05 Apr 2008, 7:20 am

The Blame Game.
Just because their little treasure isn`t Neuro Typical some parents have to blame it on vaccines, other people or institutions or companies.The possibility of millions of dollars in undeserved compensation is another motive.They should be thankful that they have a child when others who would be better parents do not.



DaveSeidel
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 27
Location: New Hampshire, US

05 Apr 2008, 8:01 am

The_Cucumber wrote:
Wow....

From what I've read it looks like it was possibly incurred by an inability to understand that the entire public will not necessarily take their side in this issue. Which is a simple matter of incompetence and lack of prior knowledge of the issue at best.


At worst it's of course an intentional attempt to prevent people from making statements critical of their case, which is a blatant violation of first amendment rights.


<sarcasm>Maybe it indicates a lack of Theory of Mind on the part of the lawyer and his clients.</sarcasm>

But seriously, thanks to dkmnow and all the other bloggers who are being so supportive.

(Disclosure: I'm married to Kathleen Seidel.)



alex
Developer
Developer

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,808
Location: Beverly Hills, CA

05 Apr 2008, 9:31 am

What's ridiculous is that a judge actually went along with a subpoena of Kathleen due to some sort of crackpot conspiracy theory held by the plaintiffs.


_________________
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/alexplank

Personal FB: http://fb.me/alexplank1


DaveSeidel
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 27
Location: New Hampshire, US

05 Apr 2008, 9:52 am

alex wrote:
What's ridiculous is that a judge actually went along with a subpoena of Kathleen due to some sort of crackpot conspiracy theory held by the plaintiffs.


Actually, a judge was not involved. As I understand it, there are two kinds of subpoenas: court-issued and attorney-issued. The former probably has to be approved by a judge, but the latter does not. This subpoena was attorney-issued.

Of course, now that Kathleen has filed her motion to quash, it will be seen by a judge.



westernwild
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2007
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 326
Location: The wild, wild West

05 Apr 2008, 10:30 am

DaveSeidel wrote:
alex wrote:
What's ridiculous is that a judge actually went along with a subpoena of Kathleen due to some sort of crackpot conspiracy theory held by the plaintiffs.


Actually, a judge was not involved. As I understand it, there are two kinds of subpoenas: court-issued and attorney-issued. The former probably has to be approved by a judge, but the latter does not. This subpoena was attorney-issued.

Of course, now that Kathleen has filed her motion to quash, it will be seen by a judge.


That is quite correct. This was attorney-issued. However, attorney-issued subpoenas can, indeed, be challenged and often are, since they're too often overbroad/overreaching in their scope or just plain illegal. I can't imagine any judge in their right mind allowing this to go forward. Then again, I'm in the legal field and know firsthand that just because you're a judge doesn't mean you're in your right mind.

The problem the courts are having nowadays is that the law has not yet caught up to technology. IOW, the technology of the web is giving rise to all kinds of legal problems and issues where there are no specific laws regarding them and where the courts have no prior case law to rely upon in judging them.


_________________
Queen of the anti-FAAAS. FAAAS does NOT speak for me and many other families!!

Life is not about waiting out storms, but learning to dance in the rain-Anonymous


KenG
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,074
Location: Israel

05 Apr 2008, 11:31 am

Dave, your avatar is the cover of King Crimson's "Larks' Tongues in Aspic"! I love it!
(but I would prefer the title "Larks' Tongues are Aspie")


_________________
AUTSCAPE -- Autistic-run Conference and Retreat in the UK
http://www.autscape.org/


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,695
Location: Northern California

05 Apr 2008, 12:03 pm

To my eyes, and I admit I am not a lawyer, but Kathleen's response is EXCELLENT. Succint, to the point, researched, direct. I have no idea how to help with all this, but I really respect her professionalism in responding.

Lol, given all the hateful rhetoric I often see when I follow links, that level of professionalism is really refreshing. I can't imagine her NOT winning on this one.


_________________
Mom to an amazing AS college son (plus a non-AS high school daughter). Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


DaveSeidel
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 27
Location: New Hampshire, US

05 Apr 2008, 3:28 pm

KenG wrote:
Dave, your avatar is the cover of King Crimson's "Larks' Tongues in Aspic"! I love it!
(but I would prefer the title "Larks' Tongues are Aspie")


I'm glad you recognized it! And I like your variation, too.



westernwild
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2007
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 326
Location: The wild, wild West

05 Apr 2008, 3:43 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:
To my eyes, and I admit I am not a lawyer, but Kathleen's response is EXCELLENT. Succint, to the point, researched, direct. I have no idea how to help with all this, but I really respect her professionalism in responding.

Lol, given all the hateful rhetoric I often see when I follow links, that level of professionalism is really refreshing. I can't imagine her NOT winning on this one.


Agree totally, I'm very impressed. Don't ever be certain what will happen in court, though, when you're in the legal field, it doesn't take very long to learn that you never, ever know what judges and juries are ultimately going to do.


_________________
Queen of the anti-FAAAS. FAAAS does NOT speak for me and many other families!!

Life is not about waiting out storms, but learning to dance in the rain-Anonymous


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,695
Location: Northern California

05 Apr 2008, 4:03 pm

westernwild wrote:

Don't ever be certain what will happen in court, though, when you're in the legal field, it doesn't take very long to learn that you never, ever know what judges and juries are ultimately going to do.


Sad, but true.

But I'll think it's unfair based on the facts, and not just emotion, or a poorly engaged fight :wink:


_________________
Mom to an amazing AS college son (plus a non-AS high school daughter). Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


westernwild
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2007
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 326
Location: The wild, wild West

05 Apr 2008, 4:16 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:
westernwild wrote:

Don't ever be certain what will happen in court, though, when you're in the legal field, it doesn't take very long to learn that you never, ever know what judges and juries are ultimately going to do.


Sad, but true.

But I'll think it's unfair based on the facts, and not just emotion, or a poorly engaged fight :wink:


Oh, absolutely it is. And here's hoping that the judge will see that!!


_________________
Queen of the anti-FAAAS. FAAAS does NOT speak for me and many other families!!

Life is not about waiting out storms, but learning to dance in the rain-Anonymous


dkmnow
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 30

05 Apr 2008, 7:58 pm

Hi, Dave! Great to see you here. As an old Yes / Bruford fan, when KenG pointed out your LTIA cover art, I was more than a little embarrassed that I hadn't noticed it.

I hope Kathleen is doing well, and not stressing out, etc., as I would be if in her position. I think the best "defense" I could muster would be to appear for depo, and just answer every question by saying "I am not, nor have I ever been, a member of the Communist Party." Then, at the very worst, I could still laugh on my way to the gallows. :-p

I'ma give the netertoobs another day or so to work their magic, then I'll send Shoemaker the link to my "Open Letter," along with a few other choice links and observations. Meanwhile, I'm thinking of firing off an e-mail to the NH and VA chapters of the ACLU, among others -- given the extra-outlandish "religion" bidness in item #9 that's just begging to be lambasted from-sea-to-shining-sea -- and I think I'll take a look at the Americans United site and listservs as well. I keep almost e-mailing Scott Horton, but reminding myself that, with taking on DOJ corruption and all, he's got bigger fish to fry.

This is a rare case in which a whole host of my pet interests/peeves seem to have converged in an unusually concrete way, so even despite my being unable to organize three words on a blank page most of the time, I'm unusually motivated in this case.

Now, if GSK would just pay me what they owe me for "promoting" them (Paxil Study 329, anyone?), now THAT would be something!

:-D



Roxas_XIII
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jan 2007
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,298
Location: Laramie, WY

05 Apr 2008, 10:42 pm

dkmnow wrote:
Hi, Dave! Great to see you here. As an old Yes / Bruford fan, when KenG pointed out your LTIA cover art, I was more than a little embarrassed that I hadn't noticed it.

I hope Kathleen is doing well, and not stressing out, etc., as I would be if in her position. I think the best "defense" I could muster would be to appear for depo, and just answer every question by saying "I am not, nor have I ever been, a member of the Communist Party." Then, at the very worst, I could still laugh on my way to the gallows. :-p

I'ma give the netertoobs another day or so to work their magic, then I'll send Shoemaker the link to my "Open Letter," along with a few other choice links and observations. Meanwhile, I'm thinking of firing off an e-mail to the NH and VA chapters of the ACLU, among others -- given the extra-outlandish "religion" bidness in item #9 that's just begging to be lambasted from-sea-to-shining-sea -- and I think I'll take a look at the Americans United site and listservs as well. I keep almost e-mailing Scott Horton, but reminding myself that, with taking on DOJ corruption and all, he's got bigger fish to fry.

This is a rare case in which a whole host of my pet interests/peeves seem to have converged in an unusually concrete way, so even despite my being unable to organize three words on a blank page most of the time, I'm unusually motivated in this case.

Now, if GSK would just pay me what they owe me for "promoting" them (Paxil Study 329, anyone?), now THAT would be something!

:-D


Go get em.


_________________
"Yeah, so this one time, I tried playing poker with tarot cards... got a full house, and about four people died." ~ Unknown comedian

Happy New Year from WP's resident fortune-teller! May the cards be ever in your favor.