Since same-sex marriage is recognized by the federal government, why do some U.S. Senators' online contact forms discriminate, while others express equality??

In the United States of America same-sex marriage is recognized by the federal government. As Wikipedia tells it:

 On October 18, 2012, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals became the first court to hold sexual orientation to be a quasi-suspect classification and applied intermediate scrutiny to strike down Section 3 of DOMA as unconstitutional in Windsor v. United States.^[14] The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Windsor on June 26, 2013, that Section 3 violated the Fifth Amendment.^[15][c] As a result of the Windsor decision, married same-sex couples—regardless of domicile—have federal tax benefits (including the ability to file joint federal income tax returns), military benefits, federal employment benefits, and immigration benefits.^{[16][17][18][19]} In February 2014, the Justice Department expanded federal recognition of same-sex marriages to include bankruptcies, prison visits, survivor benefits and refusing to testify against a spouse.

So, why then do the comment submission forms on United States senators' web sites discriminate against married gay people? Here, for example, is Louisiana Senator David Vitter's comment form:

 Do you see any acknowledgement of married same-sex couples?

Compare this with Vermont Senator Leahy's comment form:

And this is California Senator Boxer's form:

Not quite as all-inclusive as Senatory Leahy, but a good try!

Shouldn't all federal senator's have to acknowledge federal law and the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court? Check your senator's web site, and urge them to take action if they are discriminating against married same-sex couples!

Chilling speech and avoiding discovery: the legal antics of a homophobic Mississippi blogger (he makes enemies everywhere he goes)

 "intrepid, courageous patriots who understand our 
United States Constitution and believe in the necessity for absolute freedom of speech."  

Anne-Marie Vandenweghe describing Douglas Handshoe & 
Bobby Truitt in 2015

Oh, really?

intrepid, courageous patriots who understand our United States Constitution and believe in the necessity for absolute freedom of speech. - See more at: http://slabbed.org/2015/02/05/whistleblower-guest-post-anne-vandenweghe-darkness-allows-evil-to-flourish/#sthash.M56LeYti.UUifuQhf.dpuf

intrepid, courageous patriots who understand our United States Constitution and believe in the necessity for absolute freedom of speech. - See more at: http://slabbed.org/2015/02/05/whistleblower-guest-post-anne-vandenweghe-darkness-allows-evil-to-flourish/#sthash.M56LeYti.UUifuQhf.dpuf

Free speech? For me only, thank you

Sometime recently, homophobic Mississippi blogger Douglas Handshoe sued two newspapers, the Toronto Star and the Halifax Chronicle-Herald for libel. He also sued an investigative reporter for the Star, Peter Edwards. He filed the actions in Hancock County Circuit Court, Mississippi. In 2013, Handshoe sued Nova Scotia legal commentator Michael Coyle for libel, also in Hancock County, for an article on his legal affairs web site that described Handshoe's defeat in Nova Scotia Supreme Court. That same year he also sued Yours Truly, also for libel, also in Hancock County, for writing about his history with felon Fred Goodson. He also sued Trout Point Lodge, Charles Leary, Daniel Abel, Chris Yount, Nova Scotia Enterprises, and Aaron Broussard for conspiracy, abuse of process, and malicious prosecution, also in Hancock County, in retaliation for being sued for defamation over what one federal judge termed his "campaign" to damage and harass.

In each case, Douglas Handshoe used his own lawsuits as fodder for expanding his blog content and/or his Twitter feed.

In the recent lawsuits against the Canadian newspapers, Handshoe has reportedly alleged it was defamatory to publish that he is "homophobic." Handshoe actually alleges that a court of law has never found him to be anti-homosexual. Gee, Doug, guess you have never read the following court decisions:

• Nova Scotia Supreme Court Justice Muise in 2011: "In addition in the case at hand, the blogs contain comments based on the actual or perceived sexual orientation of the intended targets.  Those comments  are clearly meant to be derogatory and insulting.  I will not reproduce them here.  It is the type of expression that engenders harmful results such as discrimination and hatred.  It is not the type of free expression that deserves protection and  fostering."
• U.S. District Court Chief Judge Guirola in 2012: "Handshoe has published numerous entries on 'Slabbed' about Plaintiffs, many of which may be characterized as derogatory, mean spirited, sexist and homophobic." 
• U.S. Circuit Court Judge Walker-Elrod in 2013 on Handshoe's homophobic rhetoric: "grotesque" and "reprehensible."
• Nova Scotia Supreme Court Justice Coady in 2014: "The statements also contained anti-gay rhetoric and homophobic comments."

 In May of 2013, Handshoe filed a Digital Millenium Copyright Act take-down notice with Google, swearing under penalty of perjury that the Creative Commons photograph of him that appears on this blog was his own intellectual property. His notice was promptly published to the Chilling Effects Clearinghouse, where it belongs. Google appears to have ignored him.

Who says the U.S. Supreme Court said copyright was about protecting the right to speak? Not in Mr. Doug's universe. All I can say is, Handshoe gives me chills.

Handshoe also just sued Daniel Abel, Loyola University of New Orleans, university legal clinic attorney Ramona Fernandez, Chris Yount and a law student in U.S. federal district court in Mississippi for "abuse of process" and "malicious prosection." Suing a law school student working in a legal clinic on behalf of a minor child goes beyond the pale; but not for Doug, resolutely supported by his wife Jennifer Handshoe. Such a clinic usually reserves its time and resources to help those less fortunate in need of legal aid; now they will have to waste their time dealing with Mr. Doug over a case where he used a child's sexually-explicit drawing for his own selfish ends.

Catholic school St. Stanislaus alum, Handshoe delved into the divorce court file of Mr. Yount, whose only connection to Handshoe was serving him with legal process, apparently looking for embarassing material to publish on his blog "Slabbed." Good way to try to avoid being served with legal complaints in the future, no?

Seems like Handshoe also publicly accused the Sun Herald newspaper and its Political Editor Paul Hampton of being on the take: "Enter Doug Handshoe of the Slabbed blog, who has a tendency to go off half-cocked."

Read more here: http://www.sunherald.com/2014/08/27/5766185_from-the-im-not-in-it-for-the.html#storylink=cpy

It seems like Handshoe, with the help of his buddy attorneys Bobby Truitt and Connie Sue Montogomery, will stop at nothing to silence words about him he doesn't like. Those words might be on a blog, like this one, in a newspaper, or in a court document.

Handshoe rants about being the ultimate defender of free speech and the consummate enemy of chilling effects. The facts appear to say distinctly otherwise. A bit lopsided in your fervent online advocacy, Doug?

Discover me? No thanks

Handshoe also has a special penchant for fastidiously avoiding discovery, even though he loves filing his own lawsuits and legal challenges. "Abuse of process," anyone?

One has to wonder when the courts--especially Hancock County Circuit Court--are going to wake up and take a full, long look at what's occurring to the integrity of their system. Most often, if Handshoe hurls an accusation against someone, it's because he's truly engaged in exactly the same conduct he's claiming his opponent engages in. "Litigation terrorism," anyone?

On the topic of Handshoe and avoiding discovery, let's review a few examples:
1. In the first Canadian litigation against him, he simply didn't show up, despite being personally served with legal process (by Chris Yount). Thus, no discovery.

2. In the second Canadian litigation against him, court records show he filed an affidavit related to his ultimately-unsupported allegtions of "unclean hands." Under Nova Scotia law, the opposing party has a right to cross-examine a person whose affidavit is submitted into evidence. Handshoe went to the extent of making the extraordinary request to the Nova Scotia Supreme Court to relieve him from the obligation of being cross-examined. He lost, and as soon as he lost, he pulled his own affidavit so that no one could ask him questions under oath. Hmmm, wonder why?

3. In 2014, there was a U.S. district court case in Mississippi between Magnolia Group and O'Dwyer Realty. According to Magistrate Judge Walker, a defendant sought from the plaintiff [not Handshoe] "disclosure of communications among Douglas Handshoe/Slabbed.org and Magnolia Group, Keith Aschliman or William Washburn." The secretive Mr. Handshoe intervened in the lawsuit "in an effort to prevent disclosure" of those communications. "Handshoe seeks to prevent Magnolia Group from disclosing what he asserts are confidential communications," according to the judge's decision. Again, Handshoe lost. "In the instant case, Defendant Bunch is not asking Handshoe to disclose confidential information or the identity of confidential sources. In fact, Defendant Bunch has not requested any disclosures whatsoever from Handshoe or Slabbed.org." Of course, that did not prevent Handshoe from wasting the court's time with his silly motion, trying to chill any speech or disclosure about him that he could not control.

4. In his 2012 SPEECH Act removal case, Judge Louis Guirola noted about Handshoe: "In his Memorandum in Support of his Motion for Summary Judgment, Handshoe represented to the Court that 'disposition of the case need not involve discovery and turns on legal issues which [the] Court [could] resolve by the litigants' respective motions for summary judgment.' The record indicates that there has been no discovery in this action." Enough said.

5. In his failed attempt to get a Canadian copyright judgment against him tossed out under the SPEECH Act, Handshoe filed an anti-suit injunction motion in Judge Louis Guirola's court, trying to get Judge Guirola in Mississippi to order Judge Piper Griffin in New Orleans to put a stop to Daniel Abel's defamation suit against Handshoe. Too bad this violates a basic principle of the federal democracy: The constitutional right of each state to maintain its own independent judicial system for the resolution of legal disputes. This is a fundamental tenet of the USA's federal system of government. Again, legal tactics (or are they antics?) that violate the U.S. Constitution isn't beyond Handshoe.

6.  Right now in that same New Orleans Civil District Court, Handshoe attempted to have the libel lawsuit against him stopped by filing not one, but two anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) motions. Both were denied by Chief Judge Piper Griffin, and the time came for answering discovery. Court documents show Handshoe is, yet again, adamantly refusing to comply with his legal obligation to be discovered. Daniel Abel's motion to get a court order compelling him to answer discovery will soon be heard. A similar motion to compel his discovery is scheduled for May in the copyright judgment case against him   . . .  stay tuned.

Major law review article says Trout Point Lodge federal appeal case "a paradigm model of the flaws of the SPEECH Act"

In a 57-page article entitled "If You Don't Have Anything Nice to Say, Say It Anyway. Libel Tourism and the SPEECH Act" author Nicole Manzo conducts a detailed, critical review of the federal legislation the SPEECH Act, and concludes it is overly broad and lacking in necessary guidance for the courts. She refers to Trout Point Lodge, Charles Leary, and Vaughn Perret's loss in the Federal Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal as "monumental," but in the wrong way.

Considering the frequency of libel tourism, one might have assumed that the first case to apply the SPEECH Act would have been a testament to the benefits of, and the need for, the Act. However, Trout Point Lodge was not an exemplar of libel tourism or illegitimate forum shopping. The forum selected in Trout Point Lodge was not chosen to “chill” free speech. Rather, the forum was selected because it was both plaintiffs’ domicile and the jurisdiction where the defamatory statements were aimed. In addition, and most importantly, the forum was the location where the plaintiffs suffered harm to their reputations. Trout Point Lodge was monumental, but not for First Amendment protection or the deterrence of libel tourism. The case was monumental for exemplifying the broad reach of the Act and lack of guidance that Congress supplied the courts. In essence, Trout Point Lodge is a paradigm model of the flaws of the SPEECH Act.

The article recommends altering the legislation due to the failure of its just application in the Trout Point Lodge case.  Referring to the $425,000 Canadian defamation judgment against homophobic blogger Douglas Handshoe, the author states: "if there was one judgment that was capable of United States enforcement under the SPEECH Act, it was this judgment. Nevertheless, the judgment in Trout Point Lodge did not even come close to enforcement." Though the article focuses on the published 5th circuit decision, her conclusions apply equally to Judge Louis Guirola's trial court decision. She determines, too, that the Act provides too little protection for foreign defamation plaintiffs, which in the Trout Point case included two American citizens.

A major point of the article is that international comity will be irreperably harmed by the Act in its current version, and that this is already occurring in the Nova Scotia courts. "The over-inclusive nature of the SPEECH Act risks offending international comity. Such a risk could possibly result in non-enforcement of United States judgments in foreign courts or some other form of legal retaliation."

In contradistinction to Douglas Handshoe's incessant refrain that the Trout Point plaintiffs are "libel tourists" and forum shoppers, Manzo also points out that the Trout Point plaintiffs were perfectly correct in filing the lawsuit against Handshoe in the place they did, Nova Scotia.

Finally, the article points up serious potential for unequal application of the law, which in this case affected the rights of two U.S. citizens, Perret & Leary: "foreign, private defamation defendants being afforded more constitutional protection than domestic private defamation defendants." Manzo points out that many U.S. jurisidctions, incluing New York State, retain defamation as tort of strict liability on occasions of purely private libel. This makes the common law of defamation in the U.S. first cousins with such law in Canada and the U.K. Things aren't quite as simple on the SPEECH Act front, as Mr. Doug Handshoe would have everyone believe.

Federal judge allows homophobic blogger & legal clown Handshoe to sue Loyola University of New Orleans after sitting on motion to dismiss

District Court Judge Keith Starrett has approved homophobic blogger & St. Stanislaus alumnus Douglas Handshoe's motion to amend his lawsuit against civil rights attorney Daniel Abel to include as defendants Loyola University of New Orleans, the associate director of its legal clinic Ramona Fernandez, a process server, and a law school student. Handshoe's allegations against the university include abuse of process and malicious prosecution.

On Friday, March 13, 2015, Handshoe actually filed his amended complaint in Starrett's Mississippi court.

Judge Starrett issued the order on March 10, 2015, in part, he stated because Mr. Abel had failed to file an opposition to Handshoe's motion to amend the legal action to include the new defendants and claims. The lawsuit was previously only based on alleged misrepresentation under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. The judge also said, however, that under federal law plaintiffs are generally allowed to make a first amendment.

The purported copyright violation by Abel was for "misrepresentation" in a take down notice sent to Handshoe's web host HostGator. As the Technology & Marketing Law Blog recently stated this will be a difficult case to make out:

 To discourage abuses of the notice-and-takedown system, Congress enacted 17 USC 512(f) to create a new cause of action for sending bogus takedown notices.

512(f) was a good idea, but it has failed terribly in the field. In the 2004 Rossi case, the Ninth Circuit gutted 512(f) by requiring 512(f) plaintiffs show that a takedown notice sender lacked subjective good faith. Absent a “smoking gun” email (which, almost certainly, will be found only in discovery and only if the 512(f) case survives a motion to dismiss), it’s virtually impossible for a plaintiff to prove the absence of subjective good faith.

Mr. Abel had filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit on August 6, 2014. Judge Starrett never ruled on the motion until the same day he decided in favor of Handshoe; that is more than 7 months after Abel's motion was filed. Legal observers say this is an extraordinary amount of time for the judge not to rule on a motion challenging jurisdiction. Federal court rules say motions on jurisdiction supposedly have priority. By contrast, Judge Starrett ruled on Handshoe's motion to amend in less than a couple of weeks since the deadline passed for Abel to file his opposition.

Legal clown Douglas Handshoe, CPA

The legal controversy is described in Handshoe's rambling legal complaint where he appears to allege that "abuse of process" and "malicious prosecution" occurred when Loyola participated in filing an ongoing appeal to the Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal of a judge's order granting Handshoe's anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) motion in a defamation suit filed on behalf of a father and his minor child. Handshoe calls the appeal brief filed by the university legal clinic "scandalous."

Remarkably, Canadian court documents show that Handshoe was admonished in 2013 by judges there while he was a defendant in a copyright infringement and defamation lawsuit precisely for filing "rude" and scandalous materials with the court. Handshoe ultimately lost in that case, and also lost an attempt to have the resulting proceeding against him removed to federal court under the SPEECH Act.

Loyola's legal clinic was appointed by the Louisians state divorce court to represent the minor child's interests. The father--a process server who has served Handshoe with lawsuits on several occasions--was involved in a divorce proceeding. In what distinctly appears like payback for having served him with legal process, Handshoe took items from the divorce court file, including a drawing by the minor child, for publication on his blog. The court record was shortly thereafter sealed apparently due to Handshoe's publications on his blog. The father and Loyola jointly filed the appeal brief.

Legal observers say it is entirely unclear if Handshoe has actually stated any facts or law in his lawsuit sufficient to constitute "abuse of process" and "malicious prosecution." In addition, such complaints are usually brought within the court where the alleged abuse and malcicious prosecution occured. The fact that an appeal is ongoing also makes Handshoe's claims before Judge Starrett appear dubious. 

This started when Handshoe and Jack "Bobby" Truitt were sued by the process server, Chris Yount, for internet defamation. Handshoe and his Covington attorney Truitt allegedly defamed Yount through innuendo published on Slabbbed that he had molested the minor child. Truitt allegedly participated in identifying Yount and his child by posting comments on Slabbed. Handshoe claims the child's drawing showed "a young child being sodomized by a line of robots." On his blog he had published that the drawing depicted a male child being sodomized. The Louisiana divorce court apparently did not agree, and any reasonable person looking at the drawing could not come to that conlusion, which appears to be motivated by what attorney Abel termed Handshoe's personal obsession with other men's sexuality. Truitt has, since Handshoe's intention to sue Loyola became public, withdrawn the Truitt Law Firm's advertising from Handshoe's web site, distancing himself from the blog. Truitt graduated from Loyola Law School.

An open question remains as to whether Handshoe will "man up"--one of his favorite phrases--and actually serve Loyola, Fernandez, and the others with the lawsuit, or if he's simply engaged in using the courts to chill speech he doesn't like.

According to the district court order, Abel is free to again file documents seeking dismissals of the lawsuit, including possibly seeking attorney's fees, which started when Abel served a takedown notice on Handshoe's web host pursuant to an order from the Louisiana court. The aim was to have the sensitive drawing removed from publication on Handshoe's blog. Allegedly, Handshoe published the drawing yet again in another blog post. Remarkably, Judge Starrett also earlier denied Abel's motion to remove the sexually-explicit image from the public court file available online. 

Abel claims he has no contacts with Mississippi. One can only wonder how Handshoe and his wife Jennifer Handshoe or any other parents would respond to having their child's drawing published prominently on the internet, let alone alongside alleged accusations about sexual molestation.

Loyola, attorney Fernandez, and the other defendants will now likely have to answer Handshoe as well. They are likely to seek dismissal on various grounds as well as fees & costs.

If the case goes forward, it will pose numerous legal questions, including the boundaries of the First Amendment and a Mississippi federal court's power to interfere in the judicial process of Louisiana state courts. Handshoe's action could be seen as an illegal collateral attack. Handshoe's motives, privacy concerns and the protection of the minor child will be important issues.

Beclowning judges & fraudulent misrepresentations: Doug Handshoe's favorite topic. A commentary on "intrinsic" versus "extrinsic" in cases of fraud on the court

Consistency and candor with the court can make or break any case, but American judges who encounter "a deliberately planned and carefully executed scheme" to influence the court through machinations done outside the court's process is seen as among the most reprehensible conduct, which strikes at the very heart of the institution of justice.  A misrepresentation made within a proceeding, such as perjury, is called "intrinsic" while the latter kind of scheme is known as "extrinsic."

In June of 2013, homophobic blogger Douglas Handshoe was the Respondent in a copyright infringement lawsuit brought by Trout Point Lodge, Vaughn Perret, and Charles Leary in Nova Scotia Supeme Court. According to the U.S. Federal District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, Handshoe was since 2011 on a "campaign" to harass, damage, and embarass, Trout Point, Leary & Perret online. This included publishing their copyrighted photographs without permission.

Unlike the previous lawsuit launched against Handshoe by the Trout Point plaintiffs, in this 2013 case Handshoe appeared and defended in Nova Scotia. He was, he stated on his blog, going to show the Nova Scotia judges how they had previously been "beclowned" by Leary & Perret, whom the Slabbed blog had targetted with a plethora of homophobic epithets including "queer fag scum."

In his "Reply to Applicants' Motion to Strike & Summary Disposal," signed by him and filed with the Nova Scotia Court on June 24, Handshoe made the following statement:

Remember that statement regarding an alleged link betwen Handshoe "and the Attorneys for Concrete Busters." That is that "any allegation of a connection is both fanciful and concocted from whole cloth." It is important because in April, 2013, Judge Louis Guirola filed in the court record a letter from Louisiana attorney Daniel Abel stating his belief that Handshoe and his attorney Bobby Truitt had confected a scheme to place false criminal allegations in an amended lawsuit by two waste disposal companies against Frederick Heebe and the River Birch Landfill. In particular, that lawsuit named Trout Point Lodge and another of Abel, Leary, and Perret's businesses, Cerro Coyote, S.A., as "shell companies" involved in a criminal RICO conspiracy with former politican Aaron Broussard. At that point, a waste disposal contract given to River Birch by Broussard's administrtion was under federal criminal investigation. The investigation of River Birch later collapsed.

When the Court filed that letter into the record in April, 2013, Handshoe and attorney Truitt remained silent: no response.

Trout Point, Perret, & Leary then succesfully moved the 5th Circuit Court of Appeal to expand the record of evidence on appeal to include Abel's letter and a letter from "Attorneys for Concrete Busters," specifically Smith & Fawer, LLC. The public record indicates the motion was opposed by Doug Handshoe and Bobby Truitt, but then when it came time to actually respond to the Plaintiffs' motion, Truitt filed nothing in response. Again, silence. A failure to disclose? Fearful of having to make positive assertions that were lies?

Smith & Fawer, for their part, ultimately retracted their accusations, dismissed the allegations in court, and said that they gleaned what was said about Trout Point Lodge and Cerro Coyote from "slabbed.com." The true URL for Slabbed is slabbed.org. There was no mention of actual contact with Handshoe in the Smith & Fawer letter, signed by attorney Stephen Gele.

Daniel Abel wrote his letter to Judge Guirola because in his decision denying Trout Point, Perret, & Leary's enforcement of their 2012 $427,000 Canadian judgment against Handshoe, Judge Guirola referred to the allegations made in that waste disposal lawsuit despite the fact that it was never introduced into evidence. In legal parlance, he took "judicial notice" of not just the existence of the lawsuit, but also of the allegations contained therein. Judge Guirola also stated in the decision that he had looked at the Slabbed blog in October, 2012, that is, after the two sides had finished their submissions to the court. The record shows that in September, Trout Point, Leary, and Perret also filed an "emergency motion" asking the court to tell Handshoe to not publish about the plaintiffs while the court was deliberating. Judge Guirola took no action, other than to look at Slabbed.

His decision to deny Trout Point's effort to enforce its judgment, available on PACER, stated that in:

So, if Doug Handshoe and Bobby Truitt had nothing to do with placing those criminal allegations about Trout Point, Perret, and Leary in the lawsuit drafted by Smith & Fawer, then the judge's judicial notice might be unusual, but not devestating. Other than attorney Abel's suspicions, articulated in his letter to Judge Guirola, there was no other evidence that Handshoe and/or Truitt had contact with Smith & Fawer. In fact, as seen above, Handshoe denied any such contact in no uncertain terms, and in a court of law.

Then, last October, after winning their copyright infringement action against Handshoe in Nova Scotia, Trout Point, Perret, & Leary were trying to once again enforce a Canadian judgment in Mississippi.

Handshoe improperly removed the enforcement action to Judge Guirola's district court. It was remanded last November.

While that remand decision was pending, Handshoe filed a motion trying to convince Judge Guirola in Mississippi to enjoin Judge Piper Griffin in New Orleans from continuing with Mr. Abel's defamation lawsuit against Handshoe, Truitt, and Anne-Marie Vandenweghe in New Orleans Civil District Court. That was a crazy move, which Judge Guirola never entertained.

Nevertheless, Handshoe filed his own sworn affidavit along with his motion.You can see it on PACER.

Here is part of what he swore to in that affidavit filed with the federal district court:

Guess "both fanciful and concocted from whole cloth" was a bit of an eaggeration, no? Looks like an outright lie to the court. In addition, Handshoe & Truitt's silence before Judge Guirola and the 5th Circuit looks more and more like intentional non-disclosure. 

Beside the sudden admission in October, 2014, to what he had flatly denied to a court in June, 2013--that is to direct contact with "Attorneys for Concrete Busters"--Doug Handshoe made other statements of interest.

First, to anyone looking at the amended lawsuit by Concrete Busters, filed by Smith & Fawer, it was not "Steve Gele" that "drafted signed and filed" the complaint, it was Randall Smith. Knowing which attorney actually drafted the lawsuit would show some insider knowledge by Handshoe of how it was drafted before it was filed. How does Handshoe know he likes to be called "Steve" anyway?

Second, Handshoe says he "read the lawsuit online" but also that Mr. Gele "leaked" it to him. Which is it? He saw it online, or it was leaked to him? Maybe Mr. Handshoe needs to prepare his affidavits more carefully, checking for factual consistency? In addition, looking at the metadata of the PDF file published by Handshoe alongside other PDF's created by Smith & Fawer shows that the PDF file published by Slabbed most likely came directly from Smith & Fawer. So did the PDF of the lawsuit published on nola.com. Third, Handshoe published the lawsuit online before the Times-Picayune did, not after. So, who gave the Times-Picayune the lawsuit? Handshoe?

Were Mr. Abel's statements to Judge Guirola that there had been "fraud upon the court"--that is "a deliberately planned and carefully executed scheme" to influence the court -- in the Trout Point Lodge v. Handshoe case correct? There are certainly lots of questions to ask Mr. Handshoe and Mr. Truitt, now that both will face discovery in New Orleans Civil District Court.

Handshoe practically admitted this was what was happening on October 5, 2012, when Handshoe published a lengthy post on the Concrete Busters allegations entitled “Civil District Court lawsuit filed by Concrete Busters against River Birch terms Trout Point Lodge Ltd. of Nova Scotia a 'shell company'.” He published: “I have an outstanding  matter in United States Federal District Court in Gulfport before Judge Louis Guirola that my lawyer, Bobby Truitt has me barred from commenting upon. But that does not mean that we can’t let Concrete Busters tell part of that story . . ."

Academic question: does this behavior rise to the level of criminality?

More stories: Legal clown Doug Handshoe, felon Fred Goodson, and questions about cross-border companies

Slidell Motel, Inc. was a Louisiana company that formed an integral part of the "O'Aces Casino," subject of a federal criminal and State Police investigation in the 1990s. Assets of Slidell Motel and related companies like Truck Stop Gaming were ultimately ordered forfeit by a federal judge as being part of a criminal racketeering enterprise run by Fred Goodson. Blogger Doug Handshoe--who now holds himself out in court documents as a "journalist" who interjects himself into all manner of public controversies--has repeatedly asserted that association with corrupt politicians and alleged racketeering and conspiracy are a matter of great & legitimate public interest. His own background and first-hand knowledge of such activities certainly seems so apropos.

Douglas Handshoe, Treasurer of Slidell Motel,
part of O'Aces Casino

A reliable source has forwarded documents from the Louisiana Secretary of State, and Doug Handshoe officially became Treasurer of Slidell Motel, Inc. sometime between the 1998 and 1999 annual filings. In February, 1999, he was officially recorded as Treasurer alongside convicted felon Fred Goodson as President, who was at the time in federal prison. Lots of questions remaim . . . 

On September 23, 1997, accountant Doug Handshoe, Fred Goodson's son, Alex, and Demetrios Pappas incorporated Interstate Management Services, Inc. across the border in Mississippi. According to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the Government did not indict Alex Goodson, but had subsequently named him an unindicted co-conspirator. Handshoe's friend Alex was also an intervenor in the forfeiture proceedings.

At the same time, across the border in Louisiana, Handshoe was acting as the accountant for Truck Stop Gaming, another Goodson company ordered forfeit by the federal criminal court, and as part of the related bankruptcy proceeding. Goodson was convicted on June 27 and sentenced on October 15 of that year, so this was a period when Goodson was already found guilty but free pending sentencing for one count of RICO, one count of RICO conspiracy, two counts of mail fraud, five counts of money laundering and three counts of the use of interstate communications in aid of state bribery. His daughter and Alex's sister, Maria, was found guilty of one count of mail fraud in connection with Truck Stop Gaming, Ltd.'s 1995 license renewal application.

Slidell Motel had been formed in 1988 by Fred Goodson, Panagiottis Hirris, and Demetrios Pappas, all of Sidell, Louisiana. Goodson's wife Martha joined that trio as a shareholder, with the four holding all the shares. Goodson had a habit of incorporating lots of companies.

In February, 1997, having not yet been convicted, Goodson was still personally signing Louisiana Secretary of State documents on the dotted line as President, with Mr. Hirras still Treasurer.  By 1998, however, Goodson's signature on the official Secretary of State renewal papers looks like it was made with a stamp, and his phone number suddenly changed to Mississippi, with a 601 area code. That stamped signature makes sense, of course, because Handshoe's business partner Fred Goodson was at that time in federal prison. Not sure how stamping someone's name on official registration papers while he or she is in prison accords with Louisiana law or accounting ethics. . . . especially for a company that was supposed to be sold off by court order.

On the 1999 filing, the longstanding address for Slidell Motel suddenly changed to Morgan Bluff Road in Pearl River; Martha became the Registered Agent and Pappas and Hirras were out as officers. Martha signed for Fred as President (still in prison). Doug Handshoe was in as Treasurer, with Goodson remaining President, Martha as Secretary, and back to a Louisiana area code for the phone number. Pappas, though, had by now turned up over at Interstate Management in Mississippi.

On April 13, 1999, the bankruptcy court granted an order appointing Handshoe as "liquidating agent" for Truck Stop Gaming's real estate, after he had already served as company accountant for 2 years.

No annual report for Slidell Motel was filed in 2000.

In 2001, Fred Goodson was still President, with Martha signing for him under a power of attorney, instead of using a stamp. Guess they thought better of that. Handshoe remained signing as Treasurer.

Mr. Doug stayed on as Treasurer until 2006, the last year a filing was made. The Secretary of State wrote a warning letter in 2010.

---

So, what about Handshoe and other Goodson corporations? And Handshoe's role as both accountant for the Goodsons and liquidator for the government? As always stated in previous posts, there's no indication Handshoe was ever under criminal investigation along with Fred and Maria Goodson. Martha Goodson, Pappas, and Hirras all escaped indictment as well.

The crimnal forfeiture bankruptcy case was wrapped up on September 19, 2005. 

So, there's a few questions:

• According to contemporary press reports, federal judge Vance ordered Fred Goodson to forfeit his ownership in Slidell Motel in August, 1997, in yet Goodson stayed on as President of that corporation alongside Handshoe as Treasurer even while in prison and long thereafter, even while Handshoe was supposedly working as "liquidating agent" and, so Handshoe claims, also for the Department of Justice. Was this forfeiture--or seeming lack thereof-- in accord with the the Order of Judge Vance?
• Why were Handshoe and unindicted co-conspirator Alex Goodson incorporating a new entity in Mississippi at the same time Handshoe was supposed to be participating in a bankruptcy and liquidation of Goodson assets in Louisiana?
• Is it normal and ethical for an accountant to become an officer of a corporation that he or she is purportedly also liquidating the assets of under court order, but that never happens? Slidell Motel kept on filing renewals into 2006.
• Is it normal and ethical for an accountant to become an incorporator and officer of a corporation in one state when one is working under orders of the federal district court in another state on liquidating assets ordered forfeit by the federal judge as the proceeds of criminal activity, along with the son and brother of the convicted felons involved?
• Who was Demetrios Pappas, part of both Slidell Motel and Interstate Management?
• What was H.O.M., Inc. of Mississippi, another Goodson company across the Louisiana border, of which Handshoe was Registered Agent?

Time will tell . . .

Civil rights attorney Daniel Abel prevails in Louisiana Supreme Court against "fabled Slabbed legal team," day after legal clown Doug Handshoe sues Loyola University and its legal clinic

Friday the 13th wasn't a very good day for "super lawyer" Jack Etherton Truitt and his client Douglas Handshoe. 

On February 13, the seven Justices of the Louisiana Supreme Court unanimously denied the appeal by "Bobby" Truitt of a New Orleans trial court decision that Trout Point Lodge co-owner Daniel Abel's lawsuit against Truitt, homophobic blogger Handshoe, and former Jefferson Parish Assistant Attorney Anne-Marie Vandenweghe was purportedly an anti-SLAPP suit. SLAPP stands for "strategic lawsuit against public participation." This decisively puts to rest any contention by the three defendants that Abel is suing in defamation over a matter of public interest or that he is a public figure. There is no public interest at issue in Abel's lawsuit, the trial court, the Louisiana 4th Circuit Court of Appeal, and now the Supreme Court have decided.

Truitt, who once ignorantly denied in a Twitter exchange with this blog that the prevailing party in a Louisiana CCP Article 971 (anti-SLAPP) motion is owed attorney's fees by the losing party, will now indeed owe Mr. Abel his fees, which could be substantial. Truitt has for some reason removed that tweet--where he also questioned where Randall Cajun went to law school--from publication.

Mr. Truitt attended law school at Loyola University in New Orleans, as did Mr. Abel.

Loyola University sued by Handshoe
The day before the Supreme Court handed down its decision, February 12, Handshoe had filed a motion to amend his Mississippi federal court lawsuit against Abel for alleged misrepresentation under the U.S. Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA). The amendment asks to include as new defendants Loyola University of New Orleans, the Loyola legal clinic Associate Director Ramona Fernandez, legal student Janey Lamar, and process server Chris Yount. Handshoe alleges counts of "abuse of process" and "malicious prosecution." He goes to the extent of ironically stating that he is being "harassed" and "defamed" through legal process by the University's legal clinic and the others. He also accuses the new defendants and Abel of "cynically using a minor child that was a non-party to the litigation" to do so. There was "misuse of the legal process, incuding the Digital Millenium Copyright Act and Louisiana's defamation laws to silence reporting on a matter of public interest," Handshoe wrote in his brief for Judge Keith Starrett. 

Fernandez and the non-profit legal clinic are representing the minor child in an appeal of a trial court decision that Yount's defamation lawsuit against Handshoe and Jack Truitt was indeed an anti-SLAPP suit. Lamar is simply a law student who works at the clinic, which was appointed by court order to represent the child's interests in legal matters, including the divorce.

Unfortunately for Handshoe, the Chief Judge of New Orleans Civil District Court, the Court of Appeal, and now the Supreme Court have now said public interest is lacking with regards to Abel and Trout Point Lodge, undercutting Handshoe's conclusory allegations in Mississippi federal court. Handshoe has repeatedly referred to Abel and his associates as "SLAPP Happy Nut Jobs," an allegation now definitvely reputiated by three Louisiana courts. Handshoe will pay the consequences, but will he cease his blogging of falsehoods?

Notably, Handshoe is also now suing Yount and Abel for "abuse of process" and "malicious prosecution" in two courts at the same time, which appears far more than legally dubious. All of his legal adversaries, according to Handshoe's various legal filings, are part of a grand international conspiracy to silence his blogging, which a U.S. federal district court described in 2012 as a "campaign" to harass, damage, and embarass his targets. 

In addition, Handshoe's primary allegation that attorney Abel is guilty of "misrepresentation" under the DMCA looks like pure folly. Abel was the legal representative of the father of a minor child when a DMCA notice was served on Handshoe's web host. By law, the father was guardian of all intellectual property generated by the child, and therefore had legal standing to serve the DMCA notice regarding Handshoe's publication of the child's drawing on his web site "Slabbed." Handshoe's Mississippi brief also suggests, Abel had been ordered by the court in Louisiana to see that the drawing was removed from publication on Handshoe's web site. Handshoe claims that order was immaterial.

According to legal commentators, Abel, as the father's attorney, was fully within his rights to act as the father's agent in serving the notice; in fact, attorneys commonly draft and serve DMCA notices. In addition, over 5 months ago, Abel challenged the very jurisdiction of the Mississippi federal court over him. The judge in that case, however, has not issued any rulings since early September, 2014. 

As previously mentioned, in addition to being sued for defamation by Abel in New Orleans, Handshoe and attorney Truitt are also being sued for defamation in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana by Chris Yount, a process server and private investigator who has worked for Abel. According to Handshoe's web site and court documents, Yount served Handshoe with legal process on several occasions over the past few years. This included in two Nova Scotia Supreme Court cases where plaintiffs including Trout Point Lodge have won $817,000 in damages against Handshoe for defamation and copyright infringement. To many observers, Handshoe's publishing about Yount's child and now his lawsuit against Yount looks like payback, including using the legal system ironically in just the kind of abuse of legal process that Handshoe is now alleging against Loyola University and the others. 

There is currently an appeal pending in that case to the Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal, which will consider anti-SLAPP issues in Mr. Yount's case, where Ramona Fernandez represents the minor child, nearly identical to those Mr. Abel so succesfully litigated in Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. The Supreme Court denial of Mr. Truitt's appeal could have serious positive implications for the pending Yount appeal. 

Abel's motion to compel Handshoe to answer discovery in Abel's lawsuit against him, Truitt, and Vandenweghe, will be heard next month; a hearing on attorney's fees can't be far behind.  Legal observers say Handshoe has little chance of winning, and will for the first time in all his various legal battles be subject to discocvery alongside Truitt and Vandenweghe. 

Notably, self-styled as the Gulf South's premier legal affairs blogger, Handshoe tried to have the enforcement of the Nova Scotia copyright infringement judgment against him in state court removed to the same federal court where he is suing Abel, but was miserably unsuccesful. Handshoe had argued for protection against the $180,000 judgment under the Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage (SPEECH) Act, but failed last November when Chief Judge Louis Guirola determined that enforcing the copyright order had nothing to do with defamation.

Attorney Abel served his copyright notice on Handshoe's then-web host Dream Host because Handshoe was publishing on Slabbed a sexually explicit drawing authored by the minor child. (Handshoe admits to twice making such publications in his amended suit). Dream Host apparently had enough and dropped Handshoe, who now uses HostGator. According to the allegations in Yount's suit against Handshoe and Truitt (which appear in an appeal brief filed by Fernandez), they used Slabbed not only to publish the drawing after the court file was sealed by a judge in a Louisiana divorce proceeding, they also both published text on Slabbed to create the false and defamatory innuendo that Yount was sexually molesting his child. If true, that would be defamatory per se under Louisiana law. Courts in both the United States and Canada have repeatedly found that Handshoe publishes homophobic material on Slabbed.

In his amended legal complaint, Handshoe writes that the drawing shows "a minor child being sodomized by a line of robots." The divorce court apparetly did not agree with Handshoe's conclusions, as Mr. Yount has custody of his child, and the child has serious legal representation in the form of Ms. Fernandez and Loyola University. 

More news on the "no holds barred" Handshoe/Truitt legal circus coming soon . . .