Menu
Login
Man this is crazy! Here I am falsely accussed of a crime and the very individuals involved have the balls to get on this ComplaintsBoard.com to bash me. Amazing to me what people can do to others. Why do that? I mean does this give them a rush being evil? I am tired but not out. What was done to me will get out and must be told. Calling me racial names and creating false statements will still not stop the truth. I know we all should be Christians and love our neighbor, but all I feel is hate! I pray for God to help me forgive those reponsible for my false arrest but the anger is greater. I think about it every second of the day with no peace. Now to see them place lies and more lies on the internet is wrong. God must have put me in this wheelchair for my own good. Had I been healthy, God help you liers!
Dear American people,
I am so mad and that is not my character. This whole mess has changed my perspective on the legal system, and law enforcement. Nobody can give me back who I was prior to this false charge or time detained in jail. Now that I am out of that cage, I want justice. No I demand justice! Louis Gibson will be a name those will speak and not forget like I will never forget.
Take a deeper look at my criminal history and at first glance one can assume negative thoughts. But "first glance", does not mean guilty. This is the first time I have not been able to block corrupt legal hits. But my attitude remains the same. When you are falsely accused stand your ground no matter the outcome! With WSB News reporting the false story on Redshield Entertainment LLC cost me a lot of money and ran my reputation through the dirt. I learned how powerful the media can influence perspective in America or to be specific in Atlanta, Georgia. My wealthy and connected fake friends ran away from me to protect their business. Even those that had thousands invested with my company, and several other business deals.
Many may not agree with my methods of posting so many complaints on the internet but I will bare it all to the American people. Several who are commenting are involved in my criminal case and are be exposed by independent investigator and companies that have given me support. I do not have a thing to hide and do not trust the legal system to do the right thing. Everyone will know what corruption is going on in Norcross Police Department and Gwinnett County. They can lock me up but they will not lock up the truth. This is a campaign to expose the corruption and plain lack of justice practiced in Gwinnett County.
Louis Gibson
You claim to have just got done suing someone but have a hard time believing that all the people in that video (they interview 4 or 5, but they said about a dozen) right? No contract will be posted for the obvious legal reasons.
All cases are not the same for my opening point. And your specific case certainly has no relation to Mr. Gibson case in question. You sued "someone", you stated. However, in Mr. Gibson civil case involves more than “someone” but multiple individuals, businesses, investors and was started in public damaging his business, business relationships, and most of all his reputation. The information related to the case was on television, broadcasted on line, and will be resolved on line, on television, and in a court of law.
In turn, the growth of electronic media has made the reporters as much of the story as the public, lawyers (and their clients). The internet has changed how cases are fought all over the world today. What I am saying is this campaign is all part of the case. Even this conversation we are having now. Evidence and traditional legal procedures are evolving due to technology and failure to adapt by lawyers or clients will result in misinformation. The OJ Simpson trial, for example...
Look how easy people are to judge Mr. Gibson now despite the evidence being so easily available by a click of a button. You think just because people appear on the news and scream foul play constitutes as factual information? Well you like many Americans are part of the illusion the media can and does have over society in general.
By posting fraction of the pertinent details only gathers support from thinking American that when the final puzzle is placed one can view the whole truth and nothing but the truth. This eliminates “anyone” specifically all the childish individuals more concerned with entertainment on complaintsboard.com and to get to those like you that can see pass the uneducated internet stone throwers pleading Mr. Gibson methods are causing them pain or some imaginary financial hardship but still under the media illusion. They respond with insults that have no value in intelligent society.
RANN Staff
[protected]
RedlineM203,
Louis Gibson or no one individual could post over 23oo post in two weeks alone. Be smart and look at the bigger picture. We will post documentation at the end of January. We told you directly two days ago. So what is your issue now?
(RANN) STAFF
[protected]
TheLoverFist II,
Can you read? The documentation will be posted at the end of the month. How long have you been a member of this site? Just click on this guy/girls name and you can tell this is very strange.
(RANN) STAFF
[protected]
Anita is back! Hey girl!
Louis Gibson does not and never has owned a company called "Louis and Associates".
Wrong Louis Zachary S. Trying to pass false information to damage Mr. Gibson's character is the actions of a coward. Research the facts before you post lies about individuals.
The only pattern is you mission to call him a lier and use false information to gain support coward!
(RANN) STAFF
[protected]
Operators of blogs are generally immune from liability for defamatory statements posted on their websites, as long as they did not contribute to the posting. In 2003, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a listserv moderator and operator of a website which allegedly published defamatory statements provided by a third party was eligible for immunity under the Communications Decency Act (CDA). Batzel v. Smith, 2003 US App.LEXIS 12736 (9th Cir. 2003). However, if the online service provider plays an active role in soliciting information from users that leads to the defamatory act, the operator may not be protected by the safe harbor provisions of the CDA. In Carafano v. Metrosplash.com, Inc., a federal court ruled on the application of the safe harbor of the Communications Decency Act (CDA). The defendant in that case operated a matchmaking website known matchmaker.com. As part of its service, the defendant collected profiles of singles based on an extensive questionnaire. The plaintiff sued Metrosplash because of a false profile of her which an unknown user had posted to the website. The court ruled that by creating the extensive questionnaire, Metrosplash played an active role in developing the information that had been posted. Furthermore, the court ruled that Metrosplash was an information content provider and thus not eligible for the CDA's safe harbor provided to "interactive computer services." Carafano v. Metrosplash.com, Inc., Case No. CV 01-0018 DT (CWx) C.D. Cal. 2002) (subsequently reversed by appeals court). While operators of blogs and services are generally immune from such liability, the more active the service is with its member’s, the greater the likelihood of potential liability as a publisher of defamatory materials.
Another potential source of liability is the person who actually posted the defamatory materials. As with more general defamatory statements or materials, a poster can be held personally liable for anything posted which reflects falsely and negatively on a living person’s reputation. Posting false and explicit claims regarding a person will generally be held as defamatory for purposes of liability. However, other issues arise concerning the anonymity of the person posting the information, and if known, the jurisdiction in which they are subject.
Jurisdictional issues may arise in situations where the poster had no reason to expect that the effect of the posting would be felt in a certain jurisdiction. However, in defamation cases jurisdictional disputes are liberally ruled upon in favor of the victim. In Griffis v. Luban, the Minnesota court of appeals ruled that Alabama had jurisdiction over a Minnesota defendant who posted defamatory messages on the Internet. The defendant repeatedly posted messages on an Internet newsgroup attacking the plaintiff’s professional credentials. The plaintiff initially obtained a $25, 000.00 default judgment in Alabama, which she was seeking to enforce in Minnesota. The Minnesota court ruled that the Alabama court had properly exercised jurisdiction because the effects of the messages were felt in Alabama and that the defendant should have expected that she would be sued there. An important factor in the ruling was that she had actual knowledge of the effect of the defamatory statements on the Defendant. Therefore, the Minnesota court enforced the $25, 000.00 default judgment. Griffis v. Luban, 633 N.W. 2d 548 (Minn Ct. App. 2001).
However, there are cases where courts have refused to allow the exercise of personal jurisdiction based on defamatory statements. In a Pennsylvania case, the court refused to exercise jurisdiction over a New York defendant who had posted defamatory comments about a defendant on an offshore betting website. The court held that since the comments were not specifically directed at Pennsylvania, the court could not exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant. English Sports Betting, Inc. v. Tostigan, C.A. No. 01-2202 (E.D. Pa. 2002).
The problems with bringing defamatory actions based on internet postings largely lie in proving that the defendant actually made the posting. If that connection can be made, a much stronger case can be presented and jurisdictional issues can be tackled.
And of course, you do understand that one person can post multiple complaints cloaking themselves as different individuals and then use this as a reference to show extreme prejudice.
It is unforntunate that people will mistake opinons for the truth.
Here are some complaints :
Complaints Board
Posted: 2007-11-15 by Cindy Hunter [send email]
Complaint Rating:
Company information:
New York
United States
I'm complaining about the Complaints Board.
The messages are cut short and some make no sense.
Comments United States Other
Share with others:
Was the above complaint useful to you?
More Complaints Board complaints
Complaints Board - fake
Complaints Board - Complaints Board is One-Sided!
Complaints Board - Complaints Board is IRRESPONSIBLE!
Complaints Board - Complaintsboard.com is hurting businesses
Complaints Board - Complaints board is looking to get sued!
Complaints Board - complaints board is looking to get sued!
Complaints Board - RIDICULOUS
Complaints Board - Liars! Scammers!
Complaints Board - Unfair! Does not list complaints against itself
Complaints Board - wrongful posts
If you post lies be ready to back it in a court of law! Mr. Gibson will sue!
DescriptionSusan and Robert Johnson, owners of Cozy Kittens Cattery, LLC, sued consumer review site ComplaintsBoard.com, its (alleged) publishers Elizabeth Arden and Michelle Reitenger, and two ComplaintsBoard users who commented on a complaint thread about Susan Johnson and her cat breeding business. The Johnsons also sued InMotion Hosting, Inc., the hosting service for the website. The complaint alleges injurious falsehood, defamation, and intentional inflication of emotional distress against all six defendants.
The complaint also includes a federal trademark infringement claim against one of the commenters, Kathleen Heineman, who allegedly violated the Johnsons' trademark rights in their "Cozy Kittens" trademark by "use of the name 'Cozy Kittens and Cuddly Cats'" in connection with her competing cat breeding business. (This allegation is puzzling given that Heineman's business appears to be called Boutique Kittens.)
The claims against Arden, Reitenger, ComplaintsBoard.com, and InMotion seek to hold them liable for publishing third-party content (Lowry and Heineman's comments) and refusing to remove this content upon demand by the Johnsons. These claims are likely barred by section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, but it does not look like any defendant has asserted this defense so far.
The Johnsons originally filed suit in state court in Missouri in June 2008, but Heineman removed the case to federal court in October 2008. After removal, Heineman, a resident of Colorado, moved to dismiss the complaint against her for lack of personal jurisdiction. This motion was pending as of January 15, 2009.
Before removal, the state court entered a default judgment against Melanie Lowry, who did not appear in the case. Lowry later challenged the default judgment by sending a letter to the federal district judge.
InMotion moved to dismiss the complaint in state court (grounds unknown), but did not refile the motion in federal court after removal. Based on InMotion's failure to answer or file a motion to dismiss in federal court, the Johnsons moved for entry of a default judgment against it. InMotion then appeared, arguing that the court should deny the Johnsons' motion for entry of default and hear its motion to dismiss on the merits.
Arden, Reitenger, and ComplaintsBoard.com have not appeared in the federal action. The reason for this is not clear -- they may have defaulted in the state court action, they may have settled with the Johnsons, or they may never have been served in the first place. The disputed comments no longer appear on ComplaintsBoard.com.
UPDATE:
6/8/2009 - Court granted the Motions to Dismiss filed by Defendants Heineman, Lowry, and InMotion Hosting
7/10/2009 - Court dismissed without prejudice the claims against Defendants Elizabeth Arden d/b/a ComplaintsBoard.com, ComplaintsBoard.com, and Michelle Reitenger
8/4/2010 - 8th Circuit affirms dismissal of claims
Related Links:
•Chilling Effects: Cozy Kittens Complains of Complaint
•Justia: Johnson et al v. Arden et al
•Technology & Marketing Law Blog: Web Host Gets Easy 47 USC 230 Win in Catfight--Johnson v. Arden
DetailsWebsite(s) Involved: Content Type(s):
ComplaintsBoard.com
Text
Publication Medium: Subject Area(s):
Forum Consumer Ratings and Reviews
Defamation
Section 230
Third-Party Content
Trademark
User Comments or Submissions
Court Information & DocumentsLocation of Filing/Threat: Source of Law:
Missouri United States; Missouri
Court Name: Court Type:
Circuit Court of Putnam County, Missouri; United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri Federal; State
Case Number:
No. 08AJ-CC0047 (state court); No. 5:08-cv-6103 (federal court)
Relevant Documents:
Notice of Removal Johnson v. Arden [protected])
Heineman's Motion to Dismiss [protected])
Suggestions in Support of Heineman's Motion to Dismiss [protected])
Letter of Melanie Lowry to Court [protected])
Johnson's Motion for Default Judgment Against Inmotion Hosting [protected])
Johnson Response to Lowry Letter [protected])
InMotion Hosting Opposition to Motion for Entry of Default [protected])
Johnson's Motion for Sanctions [protected])
Suggestions in Support of Motion for Default Judgment Against Inmotion Hosting [protected])
Order Denying Johnson's Motion for Default Judgment Against Inmotion Hosting [protected])
Inmotion Hosting's Motion to Dismiss [protected])
Suggestions in Opposition of Inmotion Hosting's Motion to Dismiss [protected])
Johnson's Demand for Trial by Jury [protected])
Order Granting Motions to Dismiss filed by Heineman, Lowry, and InMotion Hosting [protected])
Order Granting Dismissal against ComplaintsBoard.com and Michelle Reitenger [protected])
8th Circuit Decision [protected])
DescriptionIn March 2008, Bennoti, Inc., an espresso machine marketer and merchandiser, sued consumer review site Complaints Board and its owner, Elizabeth Arden, for defamation of business reputation (trade libel) and unfair competition. In March 2009, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York discontinued the action with prejudice, noting that "[i]t [had] been reported to this Court that the plaintiff wishes to voluntarily dismiss this action."
According to the complaint, Complaints Board published six false or inflated consumer complaints about Bennoti. One complaint featured a photograph of a Bennoti espresso machine, to which Defendant added "a comic strip style balloon" featuring the words "Don't call us! We're busy cheating customers!"
The complaint also alleged that Complaints Board diverted "hits" away from Bennoti's website, and in doing so exposed consumers to defamatory remarks and "pirate[d] the millions of dollars Plaintiff spends to develop consumer awareness of its coffee products brand, and then diverts those consumers to Plaintiff's competitors."
The complaint asserted that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act did not shield Complaints Board because the website allegedly created fictional complaints and inserted "headings, report titles and messages for the reports."
Related Links:
•Justia: Docket Information
DetailsWebsite(s) Involved: Content Type(s):
Complaints Board
Graphic, Text
Publication Medium: Subject Area(s):
Forum Consumer Ratings and Reviews
Gripe Sites
Section 230
Third-Party Content
Trade Libel
Court Information & DocumentsLocation of Filing/Threat: Source of Law:
New York United States; New York
Court Name: Court Type:
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York Federal
Case Number:
1:08-cv-03118-JGK
Relevant Documents:
Bennoti's Complaint [protected])
Order Re-Opening Bennoti v. ComplaintsBoard.com.pdf [protected])
Order Discontinuing Action [protected])
Smith v. Arden: Utah Attorneys File Funny, Misguided Complaint on Behalf of Motivational Speaker
Wednesday, December 29th, 2010
James Smith, motivational speaker. (Image: James Smith's Real Estate Group of Companies, Inc.; used without permission)
Motivational speaker James Smith has filed a defamation lawsuit aimed at some online tormentors who’ve accused him of extramarital wanderings. (Ha’p MLRC)
Smith is a “Get Motivated” speaker and purveyor of such programs as “Stock Cash Flow 3-Day Training” and “Tax Liens & Deeds Self Study Program.”
The defamation lawsuit is aimed at Complaintsboard.com, Artvoice.com, and the Xenophilia blog for defamation. The central allegation is (I think) that anonymous commenters accused Smith of having an extramarital affair.
It’s kind of hard to tell what the allegations are because the complaint [pdf], filed by the Stevenson & Smith, P.C. law firm of Ogden, UT, is a bizarre mess.
For example, one defendant, WordPress.com’s parent, Automattic, is being sued on the theory that, well, uh, I just don’t know. WordPress.com is a blog host, and Xenophilia is hosted on WordPress.com. Those are the facts. Here is what is alleged.
Read this:
8. Defendant Automattic, d/b/a WordPress, d/b/a Xenophilia (hereinafter “Xenophilia”) is a California corporation doing business worldwide via the internet.
9. Defendant Xenophilia runs a website known as WordPress. Wordpress provides free blog hosting for its users. One such user is the Xenophilia blog located at xenophilius.wordpress.com.
These attorneys don’t seem to understand much about blogs – nor did they bother to learn much before they filed the complaint. Clearly, they don’t seem to understand the difference between a blog host and a blog.
Nor, does it seem, do they understand the difference between a blogger and a commenter.
Here’s a passage I particularly like from paragraph 23:
Neither Complaintsboard.com, Arvoice.com or WordPress.xenophilia.com has revealed the contact information and identity of the bloggers, despite the fact that such information is not protected when the bloggers use the blog for illegible purposes.
I mean, that’s just funny. Can you imagine the law looking askance at blogs used for “illegible purposes”?
And you’ve got to wonder, if it’s illegible, how can it be defamatory?
(By the way, that’s the complaint’s original spelling of “Artvoice.com” as “Arvoice.com.”)
And there’re also other problems, of course, such as, Section 230, which I’m not sure the attorneys understand either.
More:
» Wendy Davis in Online Media Daily: Motivational Speaker Sues For Defamation, Seeks To Unmask Commenters
Tags: artvoice.com, complaintsboard.com, james smith, motivational speaker, utah, xenophilia
Posted in anonymity, defamation, lawsuits against bloggers, lawsuits against commenters, lawyering | Comments Off
Search
Search for:
Konomarked photos
www.flickr.com
Topics
analogy/relation to paper press anonymity california canada censorship chilling copyright courts criminal law defamation elections employment endorsements first amendment freedom of expression FTC gawker Google
The lawsuit further alleged that ComplaintsBoard violated U.S. trademark law by using [redacted]'s name and trademarks to “mislead consumers
You must be a silly. Mr. Gibson and his family does not have any affiliation with Louis and Associate. Reading a comment constitutes as fact? One is to wonder your thinking!
Anita we are so sad to see you go. But we are sure you will return for your next fix.
Tune is to www.complaintsboard.com! "Same Louis Gibson time, same Louis Gibson comments!"
Next one to comment wins: more comments from "WE THE PEOPLE".
(RANN) STAFF
[protected]
We thank you all for putting Mr. Gibson post at the number one spot. We could not have done it without your help!
(RANN) STAFF
[protected]
Im not quick witted when it comes to insults towards other people, and people even my friends at times tend to crack a joke and sometimes it gets to much. I act like it doesnt bother me but it does ALOT. I was thinking that maybe if I responded back with something good that I would stop taking the passive role all the time.
BUt I cant think of anything to say thats witty or stings as much as other people's things.
I need to learn how to defend myself verbally. Whats the best way to learn how to do that? I am a US Marine and rather let my action speak.
Plus is it better to just let it slide and act like it doesnt bother you and just pretend like nothing happened or to attack back with full force and out do them. Because a weak come back attempt will show them that you where bothered but your comeback was bad, so it didnt trumph theirs. Now they know your affected and they bother you more. But if you pretend you dont get bothered then people tend to stop.
I feel bad not being able to defend myself verbally. But my staff certainly does not have this problem.
I have not insulted one person on my board. My staff are 200 plus and it is not my place to babysit. I will do my best to address you conserns.
Thank you,
Louis Gibson
WE WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR COMMENTS. IT HAS BEEN ENTERTAINING AND EDUCATIONAL FOR US TO HEAR HOW WE CAN PROVIDE INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC.
THANK YOU,
(RANN) STAFF
Thank you all for responding.
Wow the uneducated ### return! welcome back ###.
You are a former staff member who was fired by Mr. Gibson and it must truly hurt. (RANN) Staff will help and is now campaigning for you to get a job. Please forward you resume to us when you stop your emotinal comments about your former boss.
Ok, "NormanBates". Is that an aliase? No we are to buy into this being your real name.
Who cares...
He is in business with complaintsboard.com! Look at the Red Shield as a symbol and all his postings. Plus his mother is a relative of the Rothchild family. This guy is not a regular peson just posting.
Who is Louis Gibson? Why is he posting all over?
He might be the officer or a former employee.
I think he is involved.
Enough! We all know Louis Gibson was falsely arrested, now what? Get over it people! Why is this normanbates character so concerned with someone posting him a link? Are you part of the case?
You must be one stupid person "NormanBates"! Do you own a ###in computer? Research like the rest of us.
His story is all over the internet.
Well I will take my business elsewhere...
This Louis guy has a point. I found the news article that backed his story.
Damn that is too much sweat! Carla Moore is one funny individual. Hope you "###s" got the point!
I think Carla Moore was suggesting "whole lot of balls! I second that motion English Ian.
No, you Brian have no balls..unless you count the ones that you stole from Carla...
Lots of balls!
Clever...did your mom help you with that one? Oh, wait...she's busy standing on the corner and my homeboy just picked her up... I'll ask her myself...
You first!
Wow, education to you, Brian and Carla and the rest of the RANN staff must mean you got passed the 8th grade...now why don't you go back and apologize to these good folks who were only wanting proof of your allegations and provide just that PROOF! Or you can just go ### yourselves and shut up the hell up...
That was the point people! She wrote it that way for the uneducated! But you played right into her point.
Listen ###s,
You all are not worth the sweat off an elephant balls.
Your mother!
Brenda, lets start with addressing your posted comments like above. Get a life and a clue on what is reality. Did you think your offensive comments about diabled veterans would not be addressed? Now, you are calling us uneducated? We are getting paid and representing all veteran to better our nation. What the ### are you doing on here? Get a life ###!
Those who are on this board! You must care to read and comment jerk!
Brenda, at first you joined the group of individuals in previous comments and boards that we call, "uneducated internet stone throwers"!
Now you return on this board to give an uneducated comment from your view. We are the ones that see the positive results that Mr. Gibson’s methods have had. You have been acting as if he hurt your feelings by fighting back with posting on complaintsboard.com. Your conduct has been unprofessional and appreciated in the evaluation process only. He and his staff apologized for posting views on other boards but that was not enough to stop your constant insults.
You can make all the negative comments you like but when anyone attacks a disabled veteran on a public forum it says much about ones character. You’ve made jokes of his disability and insulted all veterans that have served this great nation. Let’s put aside this story and Mr. Gibson methods and address your disrespectful behavior. Your behavior was and still is un-American.
Final remarks: you were not alone in your internet stone throwing. Few joined your assault and uneducated remarks. What more can we expect from you now? Why are you even participating in this intelligent conversation now? Unless you are here to apologize Brenda you are respectfully not welcomed.
"WE THE PEOPLE" demand justice
We are members that work for Mr. Gibson and Redshield America News Network . Our accounts are very real for your information. You are on our board putting on crap.
Louis Gibson we get your point and we respect your position. These are some real stupid people making negative comments.
If you took the time to read the documented facts and spent less time looking at a one side perspective you would have noticed all your questions had been addressed. So for your lack of reading I will address it below.
To explain the facts wrong with the piece:
1.) Not dozens but five questionable former sales representatives went on camera and Louis Gibson and company did not pay them commission earned. Linda Stouffer, WSBtv News Reporter, did not investigate the allegation made and broadcasted the story. Had she investigated the allegation she would have discovered all commissions are paid on a sixty day pay cycle. No employee/sales representative had been working pass three weeks selling Clearwire mobile internet service out bound to Georgia residents. All sales representatives had been trained at Clearwire Corporate Office in Atlanta, Georgia and had a clear understanding of this policy. The company, Red Shield Entertainment LLC, had no control of this policy because it was a re-seller of Clearwire. No commissions had been paid out to compensate for commissions earned.
2.) Who called CEO Louis Gibson a "bold face liar"?
Mathew McCloy, a former sales manager, spearheaded this campaign to destroy Red Shield Entertainment LLC and create his own business called Mad Phoenix Technologies, stealing sales representatives, business plans, and trade secretes created by CEO Louis Gibson.
3.) Why don't you sue him?
He is involved in a civil case currently and the list includes other individual and companies not to be mentioned at this time.
4.) Were they your employees?
All that worked were sales representative or independent contractors that worked on commission earned only! Clearly stated in a signed contract that outlined all responsibility and pay cycle.
5.) They all seem very sincere. How could they all have had the wrong impression they would be receiving a paycheck from you?
"Sincere", is a loose word to describe individuals you do not know Zachary S. Two of them were roommates of Mathew McCloy and two did not have any affiliation with the company. Mathew McCloy had several secrete meetings with sales representatives and made promises of early payment of commissions earned if this plan to pressure Red Shield Entertainment and Clearwire with law suite and media coverage.
In conclusion, over one year later the facts have come out and Mad Phoenix Technologies in its first month experienced the same set backs Red Shield Entertainment faced due to the sixty day pay cycle of commission. These are all your questions answered with straight facts and were previously explained in details prior. Talks of a retraction are being considered by WSBtv Atlanta News and documentation of Clearwire sixty day pay cycle can be found by contacting:
5 clear.com locations found near Atlanta, GA.
855 Peachtree St, Atlanta
[protected] - Directions - Website
3255 Peachtree Street, Atlanta
[protected] - Directions - Website
3393 Peachtree Road NE, Atlanta
[protected] - Directions - Website
1000 Cumberland Mall, Atlanta
[protected] - Directions
It is fear many people have. Being falsely accused of a crime is terrifying, especially if the prosecutor says they know you did not commit the crime against you, and will not drop charges against you. After all, how do you prove something you did not do? In television and movies the protagonist is always vindicated, but this is real life after all. According to Ohio State University, as many, as 10, 000 people are wrongly convicted each year in our justice system. Just how could this happen? Further more, how could it happen to me, Louis Gibson, a retired United States Marine? Now confined to a wheelchair with multiple injuries sustain while serving in the United States Marine Corp..
False accusations can happen for a variety of reasons. One is the reliance some investigators place on witnesses. Contrary to popular belief, some witness testimony is extremely unreliable. Especially when in my case it involves two former sales representatives, Mathew S. McCloy, and Holly Madison. Both worked for my company in Norcross, GA, , now closed due to negative press, Redshield Entertainment llc. Norcross Police Officer Eric Butynski badge number 122, who I have had several personal verbal arguments with since I established Redshield Entertainment in Norcross GA.. Officer Butynski was not my Christmas list. Even less liked when his unlawful investigation on December 22, 2009 led to a warrant charging me with False Report of a Crime.(warrant number 09w-19949) In addition, they all, filled in information they did not know conjuring up coherent dialogue. Officer Butynski pass the malicious report as legitimate.