Re: LOL--Is THIS the supposed "gag" order, you LOON?


Nomen Nescio wrote:
Gee, I hope you weren't calling me a loon.

No, of course not...I was merely borrowing your link. (We all know what
is meant by the "LOON"...it is an abbreviation of KathLOON).

"I never said it was a gag order, the loon did".

I know.

"I just pointed out that she might want to remove that personal stuff
on her website about minors, which she has been asked to remove by
their mother. This clearly violates Earthlink's terms of service".

Dunno. I also dunno if the request from the mother is sincere or just a
moronic attempt to circumvent the gag order imposed on her.

The loon said in a message: "Under CT Statute 17a-28 the "person" can discuss their
"case" with anyone they want. It is only the DCF who is gagged under the
law." Perhaps, but she isn't discussing her case, but that of others, who
have requested she stop.

Don't know. Don't have enough information.

She acknowledges in this memo and on her web site, stating, "The
statute as regards the secrecy of the Connecticut DCF "courts," (17a-28)
says: "Such records, of any person may only be disclosed, in whole or in
part, to any individual, agency, corporation, or organization or as
provided with the consent of the person or as provided in this section."

She then igores requests to remove the information from her web site,
stating, "Meredith Inkel informed me that she wanted the data removed
from my website per the "judge's" order, numerous times. I refused."

Right.

She is aware of the law and of her responsibility, but states,
"the Connecticut "courts" expect us to obey ridiculous gag orders
issued by abundantly incompetent, retarded, and criminally insane "Child
Protective Services" and their Corrupticourts "judges?" I DON'T THINK
SO."


Her blatant disregard for the law and courts of Connecticut is shameful. Her blatant disregard for
her own children and others', in an attempt to seek revenge on the
wrongs she believes have been done her, is TRAGIC.

Karen Forschner also asked her not to post her letter on
the internet, but she did anyway.
http://actionlyme.org/CORRUPTICOURTS_15_AUG_06.htm

Lisa Masterson asked her to remove information
regarding her case but she hasn't.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.diseases.lyme/msg/0e53962e3bf7425e

I guess the loon doesn't care if she gets booted.

I don't care, either.

But what I am saying is I don't see a direct order from the Judge
directing her not to discuss the details of the case. I see a direct
order requiring her not to FILE anything related to the case...which is
different.

But...I would think the ultimate question for her would be what effect,
if any, this sort of activity has on the terms of her probation
agreement. (Assuming it is still in effect as has been reported here).

.