Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 39

Thread: Great news: James Woods is totally stable emotionally and 100% definitely not a cocaine addict

  1. #1
    Plutonium sonatine's Avatar
    Reputation
    7368
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    33,366
    Load Metric
    65637247

    Great news: James Woods is totally stable emotionally and 100% definitely not a cocaine addict

    http://gawker.com/james-woods-sues-t...ine-1721102183



    Movie villain James Woods filed a $10 million defamation suit Wednesday against a Twitter user who called him “a cocaine addict,” according to The Hollywood Reporter. The probably-pseudonymous Twitter user, “Abe List,” made the crack July 15 in response to an asinine Woods tweet that called Caitlyn Jenner “Bruce” and hyped up the bogus Planned Parenthood “baby parts” scandal in one foul breath.


    To which Abe List retorted: “cocaine addict James Woods still sniffing and spouting.”

    Not much is known about the Twitter troll, but the Hollywood Reporter made some guesses based on his(?) now-deleted account: “The defendant’s social media profile suggests that he or she is based in Los Angeles, a partner in private equity, possibly Harvard educated and luckily, married to an attorney.”

    James Woods Sues Twitter Troll for Calling Him "Cocaine Addict"

    Abe List had previously called Woods a prick, a ridiculous scum clown-boy, and a joke, all of which are (delightful) opinions, and thus not anything on which to hang a defamation case. The “cocaine addict” crack (sorry) looks more like a statement of fact, one that Woods denies in his suit.

    As THR points out, the burden of proof is on Woods to prove the statement was made maliciously. And, of course, he’ll have to identify “Abe Listed” first, probably by subpoenaing Twitter.

    The defendant could attempt to vindicate himself by offering evidence that James Woods does cocaine, but basing a case on Woods’ cartoon alter-ego in Family Guy (who shares a dealer with Kate Moss) is probably not a winning strategy.

    Better might be to argue that trolling tweets are a dime a dozen and a reasonable person wouldn’t treat them as true, and that Woods was better off reporting the tweet, blocking the troll (who only had 2,300 followers), and moving on with his life instead of filing a multimillion-dollar lawsuit.

    At least that way, he wouldn’t have entered the words “cocaine addict James Woods” into the public record and hundreds of Google results.

     
    Comments
      
      rum dick: sean young will live forever in our hearts
    "Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky

    "America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs

  2. #2
    Gold Suicide King's Avatar
    Reputation
    697
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,756
    Load Metric
    65637247
    That's so James Woods

     
    Comments
      
      sonatine: literally the most james woods thing ever

  3. #3
    Platinum ToasterOven's Avatar
    Reputation
    983
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    2,667
    Load Metric
    65637247
    James Woods is faggot (allegedly).

  4. #4
    Plutonium sonatine's Avatar
    Reputation
    7368
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    33,366
    Load Metric
    65637247
    Quote Originally Posted by ToasterOven View Post
    James Woods is faggot (allegedly).
    hes actually addicted to faggots.

    faggots made of cocaine.

     
    Comments
      
      rum dick: james woods = gay sex
    "Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky

    "America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs

  5. #5
    Platinum ToasterOven's Avatar
    Reputation
    983
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    2,667
    Load Metric
    65637247
    James Woods lives with Scott Walker in a cocaine filled butt.


    Name:  walker.jpg
Views: 831
Size:  11.6 KB

  6. #6
    Photoballer 4Dragons's Avatar
    Reputation
    2686
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    10,648
    Load Metric
    65637247
    I will take this all in stride and re-watch Salvador.

  7. #7
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,626
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65637247
    Interesting.

    I actually went through this same process last year when I contacted an attorney to commence a lawsuit against a "certain individual" who was harassing me and writing untrue/defamatory blogs/tweets about me.

    It was actually pretty eye-opening.

    Regarding defamation on the internet, you have to both prove that the statements are untrue (if they're true, you can say them, even if unflattering) and that they were posted with malice.

    And opinions don't count as defamation.

    So in the case of the person I was considering suing, my attorney stated that the most actionable claims were the ones that referred to me as "a scammer", "a fraud", "a tax cheat", and "am under investigation by federal, state, and local authorities", as I could disprove all of these allegations.

    He also said that the malice part wouldn't be hard to prove, because this individual's blog disproportionately focused upon me, and all of the articles took a clearly negative tone. Furthermore, this individual tweeted these blogs directly to hundreds of otherwise uninvolved third parties who were connected to me in some way.

    So he felt that I actually had a pretty good defamation case.

    That was the good news.

    The bad news was that, due to free speech laws, there was no way I could get an injunction against him writing further blogs about me. At best, I could simply force him to remove the provably untrue portions of the blog, and win a monetary judgment against him for what he had already published. If he were to write new blogs, then I would have to sue him all over again. Since this individual was also broke with zero income or assets, he would be uncollectable for life. And he lived 3000 miles away. And it would cost 5 figures to sue him each time.

    So it was a no-go for that reason.

     
    Comments
      
      Sloppy Joe: LOL @ avatar
      
      gut: 5 figures for 6 toes rep

  8. #8
    Gold Shizzmoney's Avatar
    Reputation
    457
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,451
    Blog Entries
    1
    Load Metric
    65637247
    I, for one, would pay money to watch film of James Woods, swearing over a bible in court before a deposition, claiming he's never done cocaine in his life.

    high comedy

  9. #9
    Diamond vegas1369's Avatar
    Reputation
    1439
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,185
    Load Metric
    65637247
    Exhibit A your honor:



    I would also like to introduce to the court Exhibit B, as freebasing most certainly is considered "using cocaine":




  10. #10
    Puts His Dick in the Mashed Potatoes
    Reputation
    487
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    2,212
    Load Metric
    65637247
    Quote Originally Posted by sonatine View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ToasterOven View Post
    James Woods is faggot (allegedly).
    hes actually addicted to faggots.

    faggots made of cocaine.

    Never forget james woods' cock driving sean young insane


    "The Synopsis: As breakups go, theirs was a terrifying one. He, after a brief affair, had unceremoniously dumped her to return to his fiancée. She, enraged, began a retaliatory vendetta. Hate mail suddenly appeared in his mailbox. So did pictures of corpses and dismembered animals. Then, one night, he found a mutilated doll at his door—apparently a macabre reminder of his fiancée's abortion. The doll's neck had been cut and iodine splashed on its chest to simulate blood. White makeup was caked on the face to make it resemble a corpse.

    A sequel to Fatal Attraction? Not quite. This drama isn't being acted out on the screen. According to court papers, it's taking place in the lives of two of Hollywood's most talented and troubled performers, actor James Woods and actress Sean Young. The description of the mail above, and the mangled doll, all come from lawyers and legal documents. Woods, 41, has filed a $6 million harassment suit alleging "intentional infliction of emotional distress" against Young, 29, his co-star in last year's The Boost. At a time when both their careers are on the rise—Woods in True Believer and Young in Cousins—both are playing roles in a real-life whodunit that has even Hollywood shocked.

    While Young has denied the accusation to police and FBI investigators, and even denies having had an affair with the actor, Woods remains adamant that she is his anonymous persecutor. Wherever the truth may lie, the pair are now locked in a poisonous feud. While the movie grapevine buzzes with wild rumors about the entanglement, emotions are mounting on both sides, and lawyers are preparing for a mudslinging court showdown.

    Woods's suit alleges that starting in the late fall of 1987, coinciding with the filming of The Boost, Young harassed Woods and his fiancée, Sarah Owen, 25, trampled $500 worth of flowers in their Beverly Hills garden, made threatening phone calls and put the couple on antiabortion mailing lists. Court documents claim that the material Young allegedly caused to be mailed "includes but is not limited to written letters and also...photographs and graphic representations of violent acts, deceased persons, dead animals, gore, mutilation and other images specifically designed to cause Woods and Owen...great emotional distress."

    The butchered doll was particularly grisly and particularly sinister. The day after its appearance, says Woods's attorney, Dale Kinsella, "a note was placed on Woods's doorstep apologizing for the delivery, but indicating that the person who had done so had done it at Ms. Young's instruction and that Young was upset because he had [not hung] it from one of the rafters per specific instruction."....."

    http://www.people.com/people/archive...119824,00.html

     
    Comments
      
      sonatine: i never miss a chance to speak about his Magic Dick vs Sean Young.
      
      4Dragons: Sean Young epitome of fuckable / crazy spectrum
      
      ToasterOven: hof

  11. #11
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,626
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65637247
    BTW, you guys might be wondering why the "with malice" part exists in the law.

    It prevents people from being sued for simply posting rumors that they find interesting.

    So, for example, take the recent thread I created about Crazy Mike being broke and owing 7 figures. It is clear that I am simply repeating things stated by others, and then adding opinion to it based upon my own experiences with Mike. However, at the same time, I don't have any kind of feud with Mike, nor have I ever bashed him on the internet (or elsewhere) in the past. So clearly my thread about him was for discussion and to be informative, rather than to slam him.

    Therefore, even if Mike could prove that my statements in that thread were untrue, I couldn't be successfully sued, as he could never prove the malice part. (And indeed, there is absolutely no malice, as I don't have any personal issues with Crazy Mike.)

    At the same time, the "individual" I discussed a few posts up clearly has malice against me, and has for 2 1/2 years. There are plenty of indicators of that, and it would be a snap to prove such malice in court.

    So basically the "malice" part separates the people repeating internet gossip (or even just making up LOL stories for fun) from those with vendettas meant to actually harm the victim of the defamation.

    In Woods' case, it's a gray area. It seems that the guy who posted the cocaine accusations has bashed him repeatedly in the past, but I'm not sure for how long or how often. If it can be shown that this tweeter was repeatedly attacking Woods, and then graduated to the cocaine statement, then it's possible Woods could have an actionable case. But given that Woods plays himself on Family Guy and his animated character does all kinds of outrageous/illegal things, there could be a reasonable defense that the tweeter legitimately thought that Woods really did these things in real life.

    That, plus the fact that Woods is clearly a public figure, and is entitled to fewer rights when it comes to defamation from the general public than a private person has.

    So this case is probably going nowhere.

  12. #12
    Hi Todd JACKDANIELS's Avatar
    Reputation
    811
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    3,369
    Load Metric
    65637247
    JAMES WOODS IS THIS TRUE ???

  13. #13
    Gold Wiganer's Avatar
    Reputation
    386
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,566
    Load Metric
    65637247
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Interesting.

    I actually went through this same process last year when I contacted an attorney to commence a lawsuit against a "certain individual" who was harassing me and writing untrue/defamatory blogs/tweets about me.

    It was actually pretty eye-opening.

    Regarding defamation on the internet, you have to both prove that the statements are untrue (if they're true, you can say them, even if unflattering) and that they were posted with malice.

    And opinions don't count as defamation.

    So in the case of the person I was considering suing, my attorney stated that the most actionable claims were the ones that referred to me as "a scammer", "a fraud", "a tax cheat", and "am under investigation by federal, state, and local authorities", as I could disprove all of these allegations.

    He also said that the malice part wouldn't be hard to prove, because this individual's blog disproportionately focused upon me, and all of the articles took a clearly negative tone. Furthermore, this individual tweeted these blogs directly to hundreds of otherwise uninvolved third parties who were connected to me in some way.

    So he felt that I actually had a pretty good defamation case.

    That was the good news.

    The bad news was that, due to free speech laws, there was no way I could get an injunction against him writing further blogs about me. At best, I could simply force him to remove the provably untrue portions of the blog, and win a monetary judgment against him for what he had already published. If he were to write new blogs, then I would have to sue him all over again. Since this individual was also broke with zero income or assets, he would be uncollectable for life. And he lived 3000 miles away. And it would cost 5 figures to sue him each time.

    So it was a no-go for that reason.
    In similar vein I was once a footnote in UK defamation law, or more to the point, my avatar was.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/Print/2...l_eady_mosley/

     
    Comments
      
      Dan Druff: so the Wiganer mentioned there was really you?
      
      4Dragons: Holy shit
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyde View Post
    I stay to myself and keep out of trouble and/or potentially problematic scenarios

  14. #14
    Gold Wiganer's Avatar
    Reputation
    386
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,566
    Load Metric
    65637247
    Comments

    Dan Druff: so the Wiganer mentioned there was really you?


    Yup. I looked into suing for the libel against "me" but was told I wouldn't win as you can't libel an avatar unless folks know who the real person behind the avatar is. meanwhile as people knew who "anomalous" was, he could launch his libel case. Someone Paid him £5000 out of court settlement, before the main case fell through. Fear makes folks do strange things.

     
    Comments
      
      Belly Buster: mentioned in the same article as max mosley orgy rep
    Quote Originally Posted by Tyde View Post
    I stay to myself and keep out of trouble and/or potentially problematic scenarios

  15. #15
    Canadrunk limitles's Avatar
    Reputation
    1654
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    In Todd's head
    Posts
    17,635
    Blog Entries
    1
    Load Metric
    65637247
    Not sure about this but I recently heard someone else getting slammed on twitter and the thought from them was a "public figure", which they were, has little to no chance against a twitter blast as opposed to Joe Individual.

    Also,

    Mosley orgy judge blocks web forum libel writ onslaught

    I took a look at that headline, then a second and decided I just can't at this point.

    What literary giant put those words together and what in gord's name has Wiganer

    done now?

  16. #16
    Photoballer 4Dragons's Avatar
    Reputation
    2686
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    10,648
    Load Metric
    65637247
    Quote Originally Posted by limitles View Post
    Not sure about this but I recently heard someone else getting slammed on twitter and the thought from them was a "public figure", which they were, has little to no chance against a twitter blast as opposed to Joe Individual.

    Also,

    Mosley orgy judge blocks web forum libel writ onslaught

    I took a look at that headline, then a second and decided I just can't at this point.

    What literary giant put those words together and what in gord's name has Wiganer

    done now?
    Are you suggesting that his towers are faulty?

  17. #17
    Platinum GrenadaRoger's Avatar
    Reputation
    448
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,635
    Load Metric
    65637247
    Yipee!! Him not addicted means there is more for the rest of us!!!
    (long before there was a PFA i had my Grenade & Crossbones avatar at DD)

  18. #18
    Canadrunk limitles's Avatar
    Reputation
    1654
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    In Todd's head
    Posts
    17,635
    Blog Entries
    1
    Load Metric
    65637247
    Quote Originally Posted by 4Dragons View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by limitles View Post
    Not sure about this but I recently heard someone else getting slammed on twitter and the thought from them was a "public figure", which they were, has little to no chance against a twitter blast as opposed to Joe Individual.

    Also,

    Mosley orgy judge blocks web forum libel writ onslaught

    I took a look at that headline, then a second and decided I just can't at this point.

    What literary giant put those words together and what in gord's name has Wiganer

    done now?
    Are you suggesting that his towers are faulty?
    Dunno. Some Geordie editor no doubt.

    Bye tunderin jessus bay, he might j'us as well be born on da rock.

  19. #19
    Photoballer 4Dragons's Avatar
    Reputation
    2686
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    10,648
    Load Metric
    65637247
    Quote Originally Posted by limitles View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 4Dragons View Post

    Are you suggesting that his towers are faulty?
    Dunno. Some Geordie editor no doubt.

    Bye tunderin jessus bay, he might j'us as well be born on da rock.

    Why-aye man, he's off on the Toon gettin' mortal.

  20. #20
    Platinum ToasterOven's Avatar
    Reputation
    983
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    2,667
    Load Metric
    65637247
    Druff with attempted murder of thread.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-31-2015, 04:15 AM
  2. Totally forgot about this group
    By Krypt in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-06-2015, 02:34 PM
  3. Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-18-2013, 04:05 PM
  4. Great News, Guys - Poolstars is BACK!
    By gauchojake in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-26-2013, 09:10 PM
  5. Google Just Totally Creeped Me Out
    By 4Dragons in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-14-2012, 11:34 PM