SUBMIT A COMPLAINT

US Observer / no breach of contract libel/slander - we do what we say!

1 Review updated:

In a previous review on Complaints Board, which constitutes defamation, an individual by the name of Deborah Swan made statements and accusations that the US~Observer maligned her in some fashion. This couldn't be further from the truth.

The facts are simple and have been spelled out in our lawsuit against Swan for defamation. You can read about the lawsuit here:

http://www.usobserver.com/ed-snook/us-observer-edward-snook-sue-deborah-swan-for-defamation

The bottom line is that Deborah Swan did enter into a contract with the US~Observer (per her signature). In doing so she gave the US~Observer the unconditional right to drop her as the "client" or the "responsible party". Please see the attached image of the important segments of the contract.

The fact remains that the issue we were hired to investigate is ongoing, and we are still working on it to this day.

We have contacted Complaints Board to remove the defamatory and obviously erroneous review, but they have chosen to leave it up pending the receipt of a court order, which will be forthcoming.

Again, the US Observer prides itself on helping those who need it most - the falsely accused. In a ironic twist, we find ourselves being falsely accused.

The US~Observer will be victorious in our defamation lawsuit and Deborah Swan's scurrilous allegations will be removed.

US Observer

  • Updated by 1forjustice, Sep 06, 2017

    Deborah Swan continues to harass and malign Edward Snook and the US~Observer. Instead of discussing the merits of this post, Swan instead chooses to spread even more libelous allegations in her comments. One word can be used to describe Swan's comments and allegations ... FALSE.

Aug 12, 2017

More US Observer Complaints & Reviews

Sort by: UpDate | Rating

Comments

  •   Aug 14, 2017

    When the US~Observer says "we do what the say" that is quite true. The US~Observer has been an integral force in the fight against my husband's false charges and wrongful/malicious prosecution. My husband, James, sat in jail falsely accused for eight months, more than six of those months was without legal representation. The county sheriff made a blatant error and caused misinformation to go viral across the nation. This sheriff had convicted my husband in the public eye. The investigative reporting of Edward Snook was clear and concise. If it wasn't for the investigative reporting by the US~Observer (based on the state's own evidence) I am positive James would have been railroaded into 20+ years in prison, as an innocent man.

    As more and more laws are passed, it is only a matter of time before you or a loved one will be trapped in the judicial system. If you find yourself, your loved one or a friend falsely accused or being prosecuted for something they did not do, the first line of defense is the US~Observer.

    -3 Votes
  • Je
      Aug 15, 2017

    The US Observer has a track record of success and a track record of helping those who have been falsely accused and maligned by our broken judicial system. Hundreds of people all over the country have been helped by Ed Snook. Without his help and nitty gritty investigative journalism, many of these people would be in prison serving long sentences for crimes they did not commit. One of the clients who is being assisted by Mr. Snook is my good friend James Faire who was falsely accused of murder in Okanogan County. The case is still ongoing but things are finally starting to look better for Mr. Faire and this could not have happened without the investigative expertise of Ed Snook and the US Observer staff. After reading the info about Deborah Swan, I can only conclude that there's more to this that she isn't telling us about. I'm wondering if she is off her meds or something because some of the stuff she has said is really crazy!

    -1 Votes
  • De
      Sep 02, 2017

    @Jeff Coder Mr. Coder, please be specific with your public accusations about me. What information are you referring too that you have concluded there is more to this that I am not telling you? What are you claiming I have said that you think is crazy? I think before you make public accusations when you have never spoken to me before is a risky position to take. These comments could be considered legal defamation if you do not show facts to back up your claims. Therefore before I decide to take any legal actions against you please explain how you have come to this false impression of who you think I am.

    +1 Votes
  • Ju
      Aug 15, 2017

    Although its never pleasant being caught in the middle when parties disagree, in this I can see both sides of the matter of what appears to be Swan against Snook From my perspective Swan is exercising her right to speak what is her truth. On the other hand Snook is asserting his own right to do the same, while trying to do his job. And that is to help what he considers to be an incarcerated innocent man to be freed. It seems to me freeing a man who may have been framed is the intention of both both Swan and Snook, although that appears to be the only thing the two have in common. I'm a follower of Christ so I do think 1 Corinthians 6 applies. We don't take our neighbors to court. Now in defense of their reputation, from what I have been shown of their investigative work while they have been helping two innocent people, James and Angela Faire, who are like family to me, the U S Observer has been doing a bang up job revealing a corruption in all of the nefarious. i am here to give testimony to that I think Snook and his team are professionals who know what they are doing. Insulting or attacking Ms. Swan is not necessary. About the U S Observer, it can allow its good reputation to speak for itself.

    +1 Votes
  • De
      Sep 01, 2017

    The US Observer has false advertised that Snook, US Observer has vindicated 3 cases every week for the past 25 years! This is not possible yet Snook advertises this false claim. Snook also claims he has a duel masters degree, which is also false. I called the University where Snook claims he graduated with a 4.0. and verified his duel master degrees. Snook claims he works with the Innocence Project, but this is also false. I have called to verify and no one one has ever even heard of the US Observer or Ed Snook at the Innocence Project. If Ed Snook really has vindicated 4, 000 plus wrongful convictions then he would be known by the Innocence Project, every judge, every district attorney all over this country. Snook and the US Observer would also be listed in the “National Registry of Exonerations.” The web site gives a detail description of this organization, who also has NEVER heard of Ed Snook, US Observer.Again if Snook’s claims were real, then he would be included in this registry.
    “The National Registry of Exonerations is a project of the Newkirk Center for Science & Society at University of California Irvine, the University of Michigan Law School and Michigan State University College of Law. It was founded in 2012 in conjunction with the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University School of Law. The Registry provides detailed information about every known exoneration in the United States since 1989—cases in which a person was wrongly convicted of a crime and later cleared of all the charges based on new evidence of innocence.”
    The link is here: http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/about.aspx There is no way Snook has vindicated 4, 000 plus wrongful convictions. He is committing false advertisement. Snook claims that I am crazy for believing the FBI and the government were involved with the wrongful conviction of Charles Dyer. I hired Snook to do what he claims he does, which is to threaten the prosecuters and if they do not obey his threats then he exposes them in his newspaper. Snook claim the following:

    but this is what Ed Snook claims he does, expose corrupt government. Snook has intentionally false profiled me as a right winger 911 conspiracy nut job who is crazy to believe 911 was government sponsored, yet he has journalist who publish on his web page about 911 being government sponsored terrorism.

    The US Observer has false advertised that Snook, US Observer has vindicated 3 cases every week for the past 25 years! This is not possible yet Snook advertises this false claim. Snook also claims he has a duel masters degree, which is also false. I called the University where Snook claim he graduated with a 4.0. and verified his master degrees. This Snook claims he works with the Innocence Project, but this is also false. I have called to verify and no one one has ever even heard of the US Observer or Ed Snook at the Innocence Project. If Ed Snook really has vindicated 4, 000 plus wrongful convictions then he would be known by the Innocence Project, every judge, every district attorney all over this country. Snook and the US Observer would ask one listed in the “National Registry of Exoneration.” The web site gives a detail description of this organization, who also has NEVER heard of Ed Snook, US Observer.
    Again if Snook’s claims were real, then he would be included in this registry.

    “The National Registry of Exonerations is a project of the Newkirk Center for Science & Society at University of California Irvine, the University of Michigan Law School and Michigan State University College of Law. It was founded in 2012 in conjunction with the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University School of Law. The Registry provides detailed information about every known exoneration in the United States since 1989—cases in which a person was wrongly convicted of a crime and later cleared of all the charges based on new evidence of innocence.”

    The link is here: Snook's false claim of 4000 vindications to be true, Snook would have about 184 cases a year, which is a lie. There is no way Snook has vindicated 4, 000 plus wrongful convictions. Snook claims that I am crazy for believing the FBI and the government were involved with the wrongful conviction of Charles Dyer? Snook has contacted the same FBI agents I hired him to expose and played the evidence I gave him about the FBI involved in Chalres Dyer's case against me by trying to help the FBI have me arrested. Snook first published Im am paid snitch for the FBI and then changed his story about me by now claiming I will be arrested by Snook's FBI contacts, ... Snook has profiled me to the BBB and the Dept. of Justice and an "anti government dangerous terrorist." Snook claims that I am crazy to believe the FBI used undercover paid informants in the Charles Dyer support group, yet Snook has published articles about Schaffer Cox where Snook claims Cox was set up by the FBI and undercover informants were imbedded around Schaffer Cox? Ed Snook claims he exposes corrupt government, yet claims Im a lunatic because I believe the government is corrupt. Snook has intentionally false profiled me as a right winger 911 conspiracy nut job who is crazy to believe 911 was government sponsored, yet Snook has journalist who publish on his web page about 911 being government sponsored terrorism. Snook has refused to agree to take a poly graph to prove his false claims he has made about me, but Snook has supported the use of poly graphs is 6 news articles Snook has authored and published in his US Observer newspaper. So why cant Snook agree to a legal poly graph? Swan took a polygraph which proves the falsity of Ed Snook's claims. Snook refuses to participate in a polygraph because Snook is a liar and a fraud.

    +2 Votes
  •   Sep 06, 2017

    @Deborah Swan Deborah Swan, you and the US~Observer are engaged in a lawsuit wherein Edward Snook is suing you for defamation. Yet, you continue to perform libelous acts. Your arguments are based on fallacies, and that makes your statements dangerous.

    -3 Votes
  •   Sep 06, 2017

    @Deborah Swan Furthermore, one point should be made about your claim above to show that all of it is based on false assumptions. The US~Observer has never claimed to be responsible for over 4, 000 exonerations. A case typically reported on by the US~Observer has to do with individuals who are currently being falsely charged. When charges are dropped, dismissed, or acquitted they are not considered "exonerated" but they have been vindicated, and these are not ever included in the National Exoneration Database. Here again Swan uses deceit and half-truths to make her claims sound legitimate when they are nothing but dangerous.

    If you'd like to talk about Swan's erroneous claims, please call [protected] or email [protected]@usobserver.com.

    -3 Votes
  • Ds
      Sep 17, 2017

    @1forjustice There is a ton of proof that show how you falsely advertise over 4000 vindications, and make false public statements that your services have gotten thousands of people's convictions reversed. Plus the fact that since I brought your false advertisements to the public's attention on this complaint board, you have just changed your entire web advertisement and have removed the word "vindicate" from your web page. This sudden change on your web page proves you have been falsely advertising these false claims since 2004. Your public actions speak for them selves. You also have removed your false "investigastive services" you have been advertising since 2004, which proves your guilty of false advertisement.

    +3 Votes
  • De
      Sep 01, 2017

    The fact remains that the US Observer, Ed Snook has NOT done what he was hired to do for Chalres Dyer. Snook has published one pathetic article that is a repeat of what had already been proven about Charles Dyer's innocence. Snook's facts in the one article are not even correct. Charles Dyer is not pleased with the one article that was published over a year after Snook was hired by Swan. Snook was hired to go to the District Attorney office, the Sheriff, the Judge and the FBI and expose them for the unlawful conviction and threaten to use the evidence that has been collected by Swan, Charles and others which prove Charles Dyer was set up by the government. All Ed Snook has done is claim he had some undercover covert investigation with the ex wife of Charles and the child of Charles Dyer. Snook claims that this is the only way to get Charles freed from his false conviction, yet Snook advertises that when you have evidence of innocence then he takes the evidence directly to the District attorney and force the DA to drop the charges. This was NEVER done for Charles. Snook has never spoken to the DA in Dyer's case. Nor has Snook performed an investigation into the public officials who were responsible for the conviction. Snook has done nothing except use myself as his scape goat and blame his reason for not getting Dyer out of his false conviction on me, after collecting $19, 500.00 total and waited over a year before he published his pathetic one article for Charles Dyer, yet has published a total of 7 false defamatory articles about myself to destroy my life. Snook was not hired to investigate the ex wife. Snook was hired to expose the corruption and the FBI involvement. Snook has not one time even mentioned the FBI involved in this case and has meetings with the same FBI agents who have been part of the 30 year conviction against Dyer, to try to find a way to have me arrested becuase I recorded my phone calls with the FBI. Snook commits fraud by his false advertisements, denying he had a contract with me after he was hired. Snook has exposed himself by his own words and actions which once are pointed out, cannot be denied that Snook is a fraud. This law suit is Snook’s retaliation agaisnt me. Snook has removed his first article he published about me becuase Snook has changed his stories about me too many times he had to take it down. This shows guilt by Snook because if his article he published was true he would not have taken it down. Snook has since then changed his stories and is trying to now profile me the same way the main stream media does and create FAKE NEWS about me, while false labeling me an “anti government lunatic" and a “right winger”. All of Snook’s claims are fabricated and false. Anyone who reads his law suit will agree that none of what he claims is even true. Snook does not think that anyone has a right to complain and share the outrageous abuse he tries to bully people with. Snook is not ethical, fair, or moral with how he operates his dealing with customers who are not pleased with his performance. When asked to prove that Snook has vindicated over 4, 000 false convictions, all Snook does is point you to a page where he has the same people listed with the same cases the past 6 years. Snook should have a link to every case he has done which should have over 4, 000 cases for people to read and research just exactly what did Snook do in order to get the case dropped… Snook is abusive, unfair, immoral, manipulates, threatens, and uses his paper against anyone who complains about the US Observer, and Snook threatens a lawsuit. Snook has lied about the consumer complaints filed by Swan and has lied about the BBB complaints. This will be addressed in the counter claims Swan has filed once the appeal courts rule on Snooks appeal. Snook has continued with his defamation while this case has been in abeyance. Snook’s appeal he filed against me is for an order that the judge ruled in my favor. I have managed to stay in this case and represent myself for almost 3 1/2 years against Snook. James Leuenberger is the opposing attorney who has been practicing 28 years as a criminal defense lawyer. Leuenberger I am sure regrets getting himself into this mess for Snook. Leuenberger and Snook both under estimated me.
    According to a journalist with the Oregonian Newspaper who contacted me about the US Observer, Snook is not a real journalist, and the US Observer is not real news. Funny how Snook claims he has worked with the Oregonian yet the Oregonian does not have any relations nor are they connected in any way. According to the Oregonian, Snook is a “Public Relations” service that anyone can hire for the right price of $10, 000.00 retainer, which is not journalism. Snook does not hold any masters or bachelors degrees, is a self proclaimed investigative journalist and is not recognized by the Innocence Project. Snook also has never held any investigator license, nor does his other so called journalist Ron Lee, Lorene Day or Joseph Snook. Other people have complained about the US Observer to the Dept. of Justice. This is public info for anyone to research. Snook also was sued in Federal Courts and settled. Snook had this case sealed from the public view. I will be uploading these case documents for the public to have access too. A RICO also was filed against Snook in Josephine County Circuit Court by Hugh Powers back in 2005. This case was eventually dismissed on a technicality but Snook denies and claims he has never had a RICO filed on him or the US Observer. This case has serious allegations against Snook and the other defendants. This case was also sealed from public view but can be requested by contacting the Josephine County Circuit Court Records office. I will also upload these documents for the public to review.

    +3 Votes
  • De
      Sep 01, 2017

    Here are some other public opinions about Ed Snook and his US Observer newspaper:

    http://www.veronews.com/blogs/my_vero/my-vero-what-s-this-newspaper-arriving-in-mailboxes/article_d91d2790-95bc-11e4-b831-735f610a2bc3.html

    The public does not consider US Observer a newspaper. See the link below:
    http://www.topix.com/forum/city/oklahoma-city-ok/TKJAUAL1B6JGN8O0S

    Here is the truth on the ponzy scheme scandal that Snook partnered with Jeff Lawerance who was scammed money from people and invested in a newspaper called USA Tomorrow. Ed Snook explains his involvement with this newspaper in the following radio interview:
    Ed Snook has published articles where he reports different facts from what the actual court records prove. Read about this case and then compare what Snook has claimed.
    https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2011/comp22040.pdf

    +3 Votes
  • Ke
      Sep 05, 2017

    I followed this some time ago now.

    "Lowrance enticed and relieved investors from around the globe of over $60m over a period of four-years. He has recently exposed himself as a fraud" Snook said that Lowrance hired the US~Observer in September to protect him from the angry investors. Lowrance believed his victims were going to travel to Panama "to exact their revenge upon him".

    I am now interested to read more in the document that you list here.

    +1 Votes
  •   Sep 06, 2017

    @Keith Stickley Interesting, if you had indeed followed the case you would know that once it was established to be a scam, Edward Snook cut ties with Jeff Lowrance and even pursued him and aided several of Jeff Lowrance's defrauded clients in receiving repayment of monies, while also alerting the authorities to Lowrances location for extradition. Jeff Lowrance was imprisoned for his crimes, and rightfully so.

    You might want to read the rest of the article you copied the small tidbit from ... http://www.usobserver.com/first-capital-savings-loan-debacle/

    +1 Votes
  • Ds
      Sep 14, 2017

    @Keith Stickley Do you happen to know what year it was that Snook claims he was hired by Lowrance for protection from angry investors?

    +2 Votes
  • Ds
      Sep 17, 2017

    @1forjustice This link to the article has been removed by US Observer.

    +2 Votes
  • Ds
      Sep 13, 2017

    The facts prove that you Mr. Snook are the one who only gives the half truth. You have exposed yourself as a contradicting hypochrite. All anyone has to do to verify what I am sharing by reviewing the law suit and comparing the law suit to your impression you have created. Plus anyone can do their own vetting to confirm your advertised credentials that have turned out to be false, such as your fake duel masters degree you claim to have. Also you do advertise and have made the claim of vindicating / exonerating 4600 people. If you have been in this so called business as long as you claim, then you know the words vindication and exoneration both mean the same thing. Let's take a look at both the Webster's dictionary and the Black Law's dictionary.

    Webster definition of Vindication is, "the act of vindicating or defending against criticism or censure etc.friends provided a vindication of his position." verb (used with object), vindicated, vindicating.
    1. to clear, as from an accusation, imputation, suspicion, or the like:
    to vindicate someone's honor.
    2. to afford justification for; justify:
    Subsequent events vindicated his policy.
    3. to uphold or justify by argument or evidence:
    to vindicate a claim.
    4. to assert, maintain, or defend (a right, cause, etc.) against opposition.
    5. to claim for oneself or another.
    6.Roman and Civil Law. to regain possession, under claim of title of property through legal procedure, or to assert one's right to possession.
    7. to get revenge for; avenge.

    Webster's definition of Exoneration is: verb (used with object), exonerated, exonerating.
    1. to clear, as of an accusation; free from guilt or blame; exculpate:
    He was exonerated from the accusation of cheating.
    2. to relieve, as from an obligation, duty, or task.

    Now lets review Black Law's legal definition of Exoneration and Vindication.
    Exoneration "means to be absolved of all charges and to be declared to be not responsible."
    Vindication is "a term that applies to the clause or clauses in a law that prescribe the penalties for various violations."

    I think you have intentionally false advertise and just have not been called out for it yet until I came along. Its quite interesting how you have totally changed your web page and have removed the first article you published about me. This proves your guilt. I am pleased to see that there is a public intrest with you and the US Observer. You have a lot at stake and you keep digging your whole deeper. Just tell the truth Mr. Snook.

    +2 Votes

Post your comment