♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Aug 10, 2011 23:10:49 GMT
The link below has a video debate on whether or not a divorcee can vent about a failed marriage. He didn't released her name however. Nevertheless a judge ordered the website be taken down. The ex-husband is contesting this judgment.Blogger Fights Court to Keep 'Psycho Ex-Wife' Sitevideo.foxnews.com/v/1102997877001/blogger-fights-court-to-keep-psycho-ex-wife-site/?playlist_id=86856www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/2011/08/09/2011-08-09_judge_orders_psycho_ex_wife_website_creator_anthony_morelli_to_take_down_blog_mo.html QUOTE: Judge orders 'Psycho Ex Wife' website creator Anthony Morelli to take down blog; Morelli fires back
A Buck County Family Court judge ordered disgruntled dad Anthony Morelli to take down his offensive blog site, Thepsychoexwife.com, earlier this year - and now the Pennsylvania papa is hell-bent on having the last word. Morelli took to the Internet to vent his frustrations over an ugly custody battle with ex-wife Allison by creating the website in late 2007, described as "the true account of a marriage, divorce, and subsequent (child) custody fight between a loving man, his teroristic ex-wife who we suspect suffers from Borderline Personality Disorder (at least from our armchair psychologist diagnosis), and the husband's new partner." The 42-year-old's blog, which has attracted more than 200,000 followers a month since it first began, chronicles the very personal details of his divorce from Allison - or "PEW" (Psycho Ex Wife), as she is referred to on the site. "She's on the precipice of 40 and probably looks all 50-years of it," he writes on the site. "Imagine if you will, Jabba The Hut, with less personality. She spends her time ... drinking her days away bemoaning her victim status, when she isn't stuffing the children with fast food, buying them toys, or pushing them towards the TV or computer." Readers of the site responded enthusiastically to the concept, contributing their own "PEW" horror stories. "I tried to provide a forum whereby through our collective experiences we could help minimize the conflict in our lives and choose better ways to deal with our high-conflict ex-spouses," Morelli said of his site on a "Today Show" segment. At one point, the blogger was literally capitalizing on his rants, selling advertisements to make a profit from the site. Judge Diane Gibbons finally called for the shutdown after deeming the site "outright cruelty," especially in light of the couple's two sons, aged 10 and 12. "Your children are being hurt because you are bad mouthing the woman they love in public," she said. "Should I put them with the man who is publicly browbeating their mother?" Morelli and his wife currently have shared custody of their two children. He is now, however, countering the actions with a claim that the order violated his First Amendment rights. "It's a clear violation of my civil rights," the frustrated father said in the interview. "While there are certain steps that can be taken to minimize any negative impact on the children, shutting down the website is unacceptable." Morelli's attorney, Kevin J. Handy, said in a press release that the judge's order "is a classic example of an overly broad and unenforceable prior restraint on free speech." Said his ex in the "Today" interview: "After the kids knew this was something derogatory about me, they asked their father to stop. "We simply weren't a good match from the very beginning. The whole entire relationship was pretty volatile."
|
|
|
Post by mikemarshall on Aug 10, 2011 23:16:44 GMT
I am interested to hear on what grounds the judge denied him the right to maintain his website.
Surely this is a clear case where suppression benefits no one.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Aug 10, 2011 23:52:29 GMT
I am interested to hear on what grounds the judge denied him the right to maintain his website. Surely this is a clear case where suppression benefits no one. Hi Mike! Glad to see you back! This case seems to be a conflict between free speech and this initiative to stop "cyber bullying" after the Megan Meier suicide. True the website didn't reveal the ex-wife's name, but I imagine people, who know the ex-wife would know who the website is attacking.
On the other hand I do believe that some immature people could refrain from a violent attack, if they are allowed to vent on the internet, like this man wishes to do.
|
|
|
Post by sadie1263 on Aug 11, 2011 1:43:23 GMT
While the site is not in good taste.....and I'm not sure what effect it will have on his relationship with his kids........people need to vent....and should have a right to......divorce and fighting over kids is stressful........I can see the need to reach out and also have other people sympathize with you or vent with you.......if it didn't have names on it.....I don't know how they can deny him his right to free speech.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 11, 2011 14:53:32 GMT
I am interested to hear on what grounds the judge denied him the right to maintain his website. Surely this is a clear case where suppression benefits no one. hopefully, the chap ignored the imbecilic order and has not taken down the site. this ridiculous broad calling herself a judge needs to be disbarred, not just taken off the bench. she certainly has NO right being a judge. anyone so abjectly stupid as to make a blatantly unconstitutional order shouldn't even be allowed among normal people
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 11, 2011 14:57:39 GMT
I am interested to hear on what grounds the judge denied him the right to maintain his website. Surely this is a clear case where suppression benefits no one. Hi Mike! Glad to see you back! This case seems to be a conflict between free speech and this initiative to stop "cyber bullying" after the Megan Meier suicide. True the website didn't reveal the ex-wife's name, but I imagine people, who know the ex-wife would know who the website is attacking.
On the other hand I do believe that some immature people could refrain from a violent attack, if they are allowed to vent on the internet, like this man wishes to do.huh uh. there is no way to stretch the imagination far enough to conjure up the notion that this is bullying in ANY way. the site is ABOUT her, it is not directed to her. only the lunatics would try to claim that anything not expressly directed TO an individual is bullying, or personally attacking in ANY way
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 11, 2011 15:00:18 GMT
While the site is not in good taste.....and I'm not sure what effect it will have on his relationship with his kids........people need to vent....and should have a right to......divorce and fighting over kids is stressful........I can see the need to reach out and also have other people sympathize with you or vent with you.......if it didn't have names on it.....I don't know how they can deny him his right to free speech. they can't. this stupid broad should be censured by the high court, at the very least
|
|
|
Post by june on Aug 11, 2011 19:10:30 GMT
This is a site about the mother of his children whom he was perfectly happy to breed with (and therefore I presume have sex with) until it went wrong.
No way should he be able to vent his spleen in such a defamatory way.
Stupid prick that he is
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2011 7:13:00 GMT
Message boards are great for venting one's feelings because we are all anonymous. We can say what we like about anyone and so long as we don't identify them in any way they can't be hurt by it.
But this guy was presumably using his own name, and his ex would be recognisable by anyone who knew them both. That is a personal attack - and bullying in its worst form.
|
|
|
Post by sadie1263 on Aug 14, 2011 2:15:17 GMT
I have looked up a few stories about the blog...and from what I can tell....the blog did not use any family names....first or last......the ex was identified as PEW (psycho ex wife).
I agree that if he was using their names...that would be a problem....but if not....that it seems it should be free speech.
While looking thru comments (because the site is down) what bothers me is that his new girlfriend wrote quite a lot on it....and about her apathy (and she uses that word) towards his kids. They are identified as S-1 and S-2.....Why would you be with someone that you knew felt that way about your children?
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Aug 14, 2011 6:26:59 GMT
But this guy was presumably using his own name, and his ex would be recognisable by anyone who knew them both. That is a personal attack - and bullying in its worst form. I agree. It's a clear case of bullying. & I think it was brave of this judge to rule ''against free speech'' which is often used as an excuse to avoid responsibility. This dad had a responsibility to his children, at least, even if he felt he owed his ex-wife no respect. In lots of cases, yes. However, I question whether we are always 'venting' our feelings. Sometimes I think we are reinforcing them and perhaps allowing them to build out of proportion. By keeping a public log of all his negative feelings, this guy is stoking them rather than releasing them. He has a pay-off for keeping an anger towards her - his blog gets more attention. He can write something down and then read it over and over again, like a mantra, reminding himself of all the things he hates/ is hurt by. He needs to hit the same heights of rage/hatred on weekly basis or his blog will lose its audience. If he was ''talking it out'' to a friend or therapist, he would end the conversation with something positive, so there would be a change in the situation. Writing it all down makes it a permanent record, makes it more factual than emotional, and there's no change involved. It's not just bullying the wife, it's probably damaging himself.
|
|
|
Post by pipsqueak on Aug 14, 2011 8:27:43 GMT
i also agree that it is a clear case of bullying. however i don't agree that it should be seen as a curb on the freedom of speech.
freedom of speech is a precious right that allows the freedom to communicate ideas and opinions and accordingly speak, write and print with freedom. this right carries responsibility.
what the husband has done here i would say contravenes the law relating to libel and slander because the wife can be clearly identified. slander and libel are laws which rightly should be embedded within the right to free speech.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2011 18:38:56 GMT
[ In lots of cases, yes. However, I question whether we are always 'venting' our feelings. Sometimes I think we are reinforcing them and perhaps allowing them to build out of proportion. By keeping a public log of all his negative feelings, this guy is stoking them rather than releasing them. He has a pay-off for keeping an anger towards her - his blog gets more attention. He can write something down and then read it over and over again, like a mantra, reminding himself of all the things he hates/ is hurt by. He needs to hit the same heights of rage/hatred on weekly basis or his blog will lose its audience. If he was ''talking it out'' to a friend or therapist, he would end the conversation with something positive, so there would be a change in the situation. Writing it all down makes it a permanent record, makes it more factual than emotional, and there's no change involved. It's not just bullying the wife, it's probably damaging himself. Interesting, Trubble. A friend might have helped him get things in perspective but I'm not at all sure about the therapist; I think counsellors can be just as bad at reinforcing our distorted perspective. They have no information on which to contradict you.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 15, 2011 11:15:35 GMT
This is a site about the mother of his children whom he was perfectly happy to breed with (and therefore I presume have sex with) until it went wrong. No way should he be able to vent his spleen in such a defamatory way. Stupid prick that he is that kind of thinking did quite well in nazi germany and communist russia. it still does in tehran. it don't fly in the civilized world however
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 15, 2011 11:18:03 GMT
Message boards are great for venting one's feelings because we are all anonymous. We can say what we like about anyone and so long as we don't identify them in any way they can't be hurt by it. But this guy was presumably using his own name, and his ex would be recognisable by anyone who knew them both. That is a personal attack - and bullying in its worst form. not by ANY stretch of the imagination. ONLY if he specifically named her could it in any way be considered a personal attack. he is not responsible for what anyone thinks. they are free to draw their own conclusions. there is NO rational way on earth to ascribe any wrongdoing to him
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 15, 2011 11:22:49 GMT
I have looked up a few stories about the blog...and from what I can tell....the blog did not use any family names....first or last......the ex was identified as PEW (psycho ex wife). I agree that if he was using their names...that would be a problem....but if not....that it seems it should be free speech. While looking thru comments (because the site is down) what bothers me is that his new girlfriend wrote quite a lot on it....and about her apathy (and she uses that word) towards his kids. They are identified as S-1 and S-2.....Why would you be with someone that you knew felt that way about your children? that is precisely the point. there is NO intelligent way to call this a personal attack or bullying as long as real names are not used, AND, what is said is specifically directed at her. since it is not, ONLY pc stupidity would say that he is doing anything whatsoever wrong the chick is probably a good lay. at least at this time, that is more important to him than whether or not she cares about the kids. as long as she takes care of them when they are there, he gets his cake and eats it too
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 15, 2011 11:25:33 GMT
i also agree that it is a clear case of bullying. however i don't agree that it should be seen as a curb on the freedom of speech. freedom of speech is a precious right that allows the freedom to communicate ideas and opinions and accordingly speak, write and print with freedom. this right carries responsibility. what the husband has done here i would say contravenes the law relating to libel and slander because the wife can be clearly identified. slander and libel are laws which rightly should be embedded within the right to free speech. since she can NOT be identified solely by what is written in his blog, there is no libel. nonetheless, truth is always a defense to libel and slander
|
|
|
Post by sadie1263 on Aug 15, 2011 15:07:42 GMT
I am a little torn on this subject. I am sure everyone has friends or family that have gone thru nasty divorce and custody cases.
There are some nasty games that go on. I have seen several cases of women being extremely abusive in their dealings and then when the husband did the slightest thing....they ran screaming about abuse.......
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2011 16:18:16 GMT
Jumbo, are you saying that the blogger is not using his real name? That would totally change my view on the whole thing. But we are told that his children can go on line and see what he has written; how can they do that if he is not identified?
Yes, truth is a defence to libel, but the onus would be on him to prove the truth of everything he writes, which might be very difficult.
|
|
|
Post by june on Aug 15, 2011 19:20:24 GMT
This is a site about the mother of his children whom he was perfectly happy to breed with (and therefore I presume have sex with) until it went wrong. No way should he be able to vent his spleen in such a defamatory way. Stupid prick that he is that kind of thinking did quite well in nazi germany and communist russia. it still does in tehran. it don't fly in the civilized world however Free speech does notgive you the right to say what you want. Deformation, libel etc all exist in legal systems
|
|