National Geographic Society, Toronto Star respond to Douglas Handshoe lawsuit, conspiracy theories

Attorneys for the National Geographic Society have just filed a motion to dismiss Mississippi blogger Douglas K. Handshoe's legal claims against the renowned non-profit organization, filed in U.S. district court by Handshoe in mid November, 2015.

Brief of the National Geographic Society

Citing Handshoe's self-created "legal quagmire" National Geographic lays out numerous grounds for dismissal of the claims, which include "civil conspiracy."

A few days ago, Torstar Corporation, publisher of the Toronto Star newspaper, filed its reply to the same lawsuit. This is the second time Handshoe has sued the Star in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi. His previous defamation lawsuit against Canada's largest daily was thrown out, but before that occurred Handshoe sued the same company a second time, with new made up claims. Handshoe's lawsuits, which thus far all seem to get thrown out, are clogging an already overburdened Mississippi judicial system, and causing those he sues to waste financial resources and time.

According to its web site, "The National Geographic Society has been inspiring people to care about the planet since 1888. It is one of the largest nonprofit scientific and educational institutions in the world. Its interests include geography, archaeology and natural science, and the promotion of environmental and historical conservation." In addition to local counsel, National Geographic is represented by Lisa R. Bonanno and Ellen S. Kennedy, both from a major Washington, D.C. law firm. 

Handshoe accuses NGS and the Star of conspiring with the owners of a Nova Scotia wilderness lodge, and a Nova Scotia magazine publisher and journalist, to injure him through a coordinated attempt to silence his purported investigation of a long-ago concluded corruption scandal in Louisiana.

Handshoe claims that the conspiracy involved using notices of copyright infringement that contained intentional misrepresentations and damaged Handshoe's shell company Slabbed New Media, LLC, which is currently in bankruptcy court. National Geographic points out numerous alleged deficiencies in Handshoe's legal claims, and even cites a decision of Mississippi federal judge Keith Starrett  issued in mid December, 2015, that determined Handshoe has a "plain misunderstanding of copyright law."  Handshoe purports that he somehow has a right to publish a photograph of Trout Point Lodge owner Charles Leary taken and copyrighted by NGS, while also claiming that NGS's notice to his web host that he was infringing copyright was somehow a misrepresentation that caused injury.

Leary was a delegate to the 2010 Geotourism Summit held by NGS, according to Trout Point's blog. The Lodge was a finalist in the 2009 NGS Geotourism competition on the theme "Power of Place."

Judge Halil Ozerden will hear the current National Geographic case. Torstar has denied all of Handshoe's allegations, and is seeking costs from the Wiggins, Mississippi, accountant. The other defendants have not replied to Handshoe, whose methods of serving process look highly questionable according to court documents.

National Geographic's legal brief, filed January 5, 2016, succinctly summarizes the argument against Handshoe--that is, the facts stated in his own lawsuit contradict his status as a legitimate plaintiff:

The sole ground for including NGS as a defendant in this latest complaint: a notice that NGS sent to the internet service provider hosting the website of non-party Slabbed New Media, LLC (“Slabbed”) on January 7, 2013—almost three years ago—demanding that a photograph clearly displaying NGS’s copyright be removed from Slabbed’s website. 

Based on this slender reed, Plaintiff seeks to manufacture causes of action against NGS for supposed copyright misrepresentation and, even more incredibly, for civil conspiracy. He also asks this Court to take the entirely unnecessary step of resolving the question of whether Slabbed’s use of NGS’s copyrighted image on its website qualified as “fair use.” The threadbare allegations in the Amended Complaint, however, contradict, rather than support, these claims. 

The Amended Complaint is first subject to dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) because, by Plaintiff’s own admission, he does not have standing to bring a claim against NGS, having suffered no injury or been personally accused of violating any copyright. It is also subject to dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) as a shotgun pleading that fails to give fair notice to NGS as to what allegations are being made against it individually. Finally, the handful of specific allegations regarding NGS that can be gleaned from the Amended Complaint are patently insufficient to support Plaintiff’s claims for numerous reasons, including the following: 

● The Amended Complaint fails to adequately plead at least three essential elements of a claim under 17 U.S.C. § 512(f), requiring the dismissal of Count 5;

● Plaintiff’s attempted civil conspiracy claim under Count 9 fails both because such a claim is preempted by the Federal Copyright Act, and because the Amended Complaint does not plausibly allege the fundamental requirement of an agreement between NGS and its alleged co-conspirators; and

● There is no actual case or controversy to support Plaintiff’s request for a declaratory judgment and, consequently, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Count 10. 

Because the Amended Complaint is deficient as a matter of law in both its form and content, NGS’s Motion to Dismiss should be granted.

Notably, Handshoe has until today to file an amendment to yet another lawsuit he filed claiming "misrepresentation" under the Copyright Act, and also has to answer a "show cause" order from the federal court as why his last claim in that other lawsuit should not be dismissed. Handshoe has filed legal papers against dozens of persons and companies in multiple lawsuits over the past three years.

In 2012, the Chief Judge of the same federal court found Handshoe prone to "conspiracy theories" regarding Trout Point Lodge, a 12-room Nova Scotia hotel and its purported connection to an international money laundering scheme with former Louisiana politician Aaron Broussard, conspiracy theories that now have extended to major Canadian newspapers, journalists, and National Geographic:

Handshoe has not published any specific allegations about what role he believes Leary and Perret played in Broussard’s crimes. It is possible this is because Handshoe does not have any information indicating Plaintiffs were involved in Broussard’s criminal activity. Handshoe, has, however, made numerous more generalized allegations about connections between Leary, Perret, Abel, and Broussard. Some of these statements seem to be based in fact; others appears to be conspiracy theories that may or may not be substantiated.

What in 2012 "may or may not be substantiated" appears in 2016 as either the stark lunatic ravings of a true conspiracy theorist,  or an attempt to use lawsuits to harass his enemies, or both.  The New Orleans Times-Picayune newspaper retraced any and all implications that Trout Point Lodge was somehow involved with Broussard in two retractions published in 2010 and 2011. Handshoe has written on his blog that the retractions from the Pulitzer Prize winning newspaper owned by Advance Publications were coerced, and part of a massive international coverup.

Stay tuned for news on the Show Cause Order issued to Handshoe . . . .

Federal courts orders blogger Handshoe to show cause, still homophobic after all these years . . . tick, tock

Homophobic accountant Douglas Handshoe's defamation lawsuit against the Toronto Star and its reporter Peter Edwards is now dismissed by the same judge who has ordered Handshoe to show cause by January 6 why another of his multiple lawsuits also shouldn't be thrown out. And the Toronto Star article Handshoe was attempting to have censored is still there for all to see:

His attempt to claim that the newspaper's reporting that he is "homophobic" was false & injurious has failed, and the article identifying him as homophobic according to judicial decisions remains in publication on the Star's web site.

Handshoe's strategic attempts to use the courts to silence commentary or petitions about him that he doesn't like seems about to end badly (for him).

Douglas Handshoe, CPA

The clock is ticking down. The federal court ordered Handshoe to "show cause" why his one remaining claim against process server Chris Yount should not be dismissed: that is, alleged abuse of process involved in sending a copy of a Louisiana court order to Handshoe's web host. Claims against Daniel Abel, Ramona Fernandez, Janie Lamar, and Loyola University have all been dismissed on various grounds.

Homophobic Mississippi blogger Douglas Handshoe shows "a plain misunderstanding of copyright law"; federal court dismisses more of his allegations involving "gay robots"

Douglas Handshoe CPA

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi has just dismissed the remnants of homophobic Mississippi blogger Douglas Handshoe's lawsuit against a Louisiana process server and a civil rights attorney. Since 2013, "forensic accountant" Handshoe has taken to filing lawsuits replete with conspiracy theory in addition to targetting opponents on his blog, "Slabbed" with adjudicated false criminal allegations. Handshoe has sued at least 16 persons and companies, some of them twice since May, 2013. He has also filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy for his purported company "Slabbed New Media." Thus far, Mississippi courts have been deferential to Handshoe's questionable legal maneuvers, in the eyes of legal commentators, much too much so. That epoch has now ended.

One of the people Handshoe sued in Mississippi is Chris Yount, a Louisiana private investigator and process server who served Handshoe with civil process, but had no connection to the unrelated lawsuits he was serving on Handshoe. In apparent retaliation for Yount simply doing his job, in early 2014 accountant Handshoe delved into the court files of Yount's divorce case in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana. The Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal has summarized the relevant facts in two recent decisions:

On February 13, 2014, Mr. Handshoe published on www.slabbed.org a pornographic drawing authored by Mr. Yount's 13-year-old son that had previously been filed with the court as part of Mr. Yount's divorce proceedings in the 24th Judicial District Court. Captions and comments authored by Mr. Handshoe and Mr. Truitt underneath the drawing described its graphic nature and clearly identified the author as a minor child and the divorce proceedings in which he was involved.

Subsequent to this initial publication, the trial judge overseeing the divorce proceedings sealed parts of the record, including the pornographic drawing, and ordered the drawing removed from the internet. Notice of copyright infringement pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act was sent to the webhost of www.slabbed.org, who also provided Mr. Handshoe with a copy of the trial court's order. On February 18, 2014, the blog post containing the drawing as well as the www.slabbedorg website was taken down by the webhost in response to the copyright infringement notice and violations of the webhost's terms of service. Mr. Handshoe subsequently found a new webhost, brought the website back online, and republished the posts containing the pornographic drawing. On at least two separate occasions in Februaryand March of 2014 after the evidence had been placed under seal by the court, Mr. Handshoe authored additional posts where he published the drawing together with comments that clearly identified the minor child author and his father.

Handshoe has said in court filings that the drawing in question showed a "line of gay robots" engaged in questionable conduct, although no one else has opined as to the sexual orienation of the alleged robots. Daniel Abel has alleged in court documents that Handshoe is obsessed with the sexuality of other men; such allegations have not yet been proved in a court of law.

Consequently, Yount, with Abel acting as his attorney, sued Handshoe in Louisiana for defamation and invasion of privacy, among other things. In that case, both Handshoe and his co-defendant Bobby Truitt have had their anti-SLAPP special motions to strike denied by the Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal. (SLAPP stands for "strategic lawsuit against public participation").

In reaction to being sued by Yount, Handshoe filed suit against Abel and Yount in Mississippi federal court, ironically alleging they had abused court process and made knowing misrepresentations under the Copyright Act for sending the above-mentioned notice of copyright infringement.

Ultimately, for unknown reasons, Abel never responded to Handshoe's amended complaint that was allegedly mailed to him, and a few days ago Handshoe had him noted in default by the clerk of court. Handshoe then filed a motion for default. That spurred the federal court judge into action.

Within two days, on December 16, 2015, Judge Keith Starrett took steps not only on the default motion, but sua sponte on issues of jurisdiction and the failure of Handshoe to state adequate claims in his legal pleading: "the Court does not find that Plaintiff has stated a claim on which relief can be granted for his misrepresentation claim under 28 U.S.C. § 512(f)"; "Plaintiff’s claims of malicious prosecution and abuse of process for filing the appellant brief in the Louisiana action will be dismissed without prejudice, and Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment will be denied as to these claims"; "because the Court has neither diversity nor supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s remaining abuse of process claim, the claim will be dismissed without prejudice and default judgment will be denied as to this claim". As to the Copyright Act intentional misrepresentation claim, Judge Starret wrote:

In his Amended Complaint, Plaintiff admits that the drawing at issue was drawn and published by the minor child on whose behalf Abel and Yount are claiming a copyright. (Amended Complaint [27] at ¶¶ 14, 17.) Plaintiff alleges that there is no copyright. Section 512(f) makes liable “[a]ny person who knowingly materially misrepresents under this section . . . that material or activity is infringing.” Under Plaintiff’s theory, Abel is liable under this section because the minor child held no copyright in the drawing. This, however, is a plain misunderstanding of copyright law. Plaintiff admits that the minor child was the author of the drawing. (Amended Complaint [27] at ¶ 14.) By that fact alone, the minor child possesses a copyright in the drawing under 17 U.S.C. § 102(a)(5). Plaintiff does not allege in his complaint that his use of the drawing was authorized by either the copyright owner or law, and asserts only that a copyright does not exist. As the Court must find that a copyright does exist, Plaintiff has failed to plead a misrepresentation under § 512(f). Additionally, Plaintiff does not adequately allege the amount of damages he has suffered as a direct result of his web host relying on any misrepresentation by Abel and Yount. As such, the Court must deny Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment.

The federal judge also issued an Order to Show Cause to Handshoe. He now has 21 days by which he has to remedy what look like radical defects in what is left of his wrecked lawsuit. The countdown begins, tick tock.

Order to Show Cause directed at Douglas Handshoe

Handshoe has admitted that the sexually-explicit drawing in question was authored by Chris Yount's son, and the court has found "the minor child possesses a copyright in the drawing under 17 U.S.C. § 102(a)(5)." Attorney Abel was ordered by the Louisiana family court to do whatever was necessary to have the drawing removed from publication on Slabbed. Submitting a copyright infringement notificiation certainly seems like a reasonable way to achieve what the Louisiana court ordered, and where was the "misrepresentation" Handshoe claims?

In addition, legal observers say there simply exists no "abuse of process" tort in presenting the Louisiana court order to Handshoe's web host because this constituted an extra-judicial act not involving the court system or process. Simply showing a court order to a third party is not an "abuse of process."

One has to wonder when further legal action against Handshoe for abuse of process and malicious prosecution will begin? Perhaps the citizens of Mississippi should be upset with Handshoe for wasting taxpayer dollars and clogging the local judicial systems with lawsuits that keep being dismissed?

Homophobic blogger Douglas Handshoe loses attempt to get a court to censor free speech about him

Homophobic Mississippi blogger Douglas Handshoe's campaign of endless litigation aimed at chilling free speech about him has hit another brick wall as U.S. district court judge Keith Starrett has dismissed Handshoe's lawsuit against the Toronto Star and one of its investigative reporters.  In addition the court has recently dismissed lawsuit allegations Handshoe made against Loyola University, civil rights attorney Daniel Abel, and process server Chris Yount in a seperate legal action (update coming up).

Handshoe sued the Star and the Halifax Chronicle-Herald newspapers in March, 2015, for referring to him as homophobic, claiming the statements were defamatory despite the fact that his homophobia was enshrined in published court decisions about him.

"Nova Scotia couple wins copyright lawsuit against homophobic U.S. blogger" was the title of the article in question, written by Peter Edwards.

Now, it seems, the article will remain in publication, as it has since February, 2014, when it was first published. Handshoe's lawsuit against Nova Scotia's largest daily, the Chronicle-Herald, was also dismissed, with no retraction from that newspaper.

There was no doubt that in February, 2014, the Nova Scotia Supreme Court found Handshoe, an accountant, to have published homophobic material about the Canadian gay couple. Justice Kevin Coady reiterated the findings of a previous court decision about Handshoe: "The statements also contained anti-gay rhetoric and homophobic comments." As the Justice found:

The following is but a taste of the defamation plead: Mr. Handshoe has continued to repeatedly publish words referring to the personal plaintiffs as "girls", "bitches", "bottom boys", "wives", "perverted" and "queer fag scum."

Judge Starrett in Mississippi federal court found that Handshoe's lawsuit against Canada's largest-circulation newspaper did not accord with the U.S. Constitution:

Though Mississippi is mentioned in the article, it is mentioned only in-so-much as it identifies where Plaintiff resides and conducts his blogging, which is the conduct on which the Canadian lawsuit is based. Instead of focusing on Plaintiff’s Mississippi activities, the article focuses predominantly on the lawsuit those activities inspired in Canada and the decision of the Canadian court.

Because the subject of the article is the Canadian lawsuit, the targeted audience was Canadian readers, and no Mississippi sources other than Plaintiff himself were used, the Court finds that the focal point of the article was Canada, not Mississippi. As such, the Court cannot exercise personal jurisdiction over Defendants under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

In another lawsuit before the same federal judge, Handshoe also recently had his conspiratorial allegations against Loyola University of New Orleans and its legal clinic dismissed as well. The blogger's campaign of pointless litigation in Mississippi aims to stop free speech about him and his actions on his blog "Slabbed," precisely the kind of civil rights that he endlessly proclaims for himself in justifying his online commentary on others. What's good for the gander is not good for the goose in Handshoe's case. The hypocrisy in his recent lawsuits in his home state is readily apparent.

Homophobic Mississippi blogger settles "homophobic" libel lawsuit with no retraction of his homophobia; after Supreme Court decision, continues homophobic publishing

A Mississippi accountant various Canadian and United States courts have identified as the publisher of a blatantly homophobic blog, "Slabbed," has apparently had to settle his libel lawsuit against the Halifax Chronicle-Herald newspaper with nothing to show for it. Bay St. Louis resident Douglas

Homophobic blogger Douglas Handshoe

Handshoe's federal lawsuit alleged the paper had defamed him by identifying him as a homophobe. Chief Judge Louis Guirola issued an Order finding "all claims of the pro se Plaintiff which were brought in this civil action or which might have been are now dismissed finally and with prejudice."

The litigious Handshoe filed the lawsuit despite the fact that a U.S. district court judge labelled Handshoe as homophobic in 2012, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal termed his blog publications "grotesque" in 2013, and two justices of the Nova Scotia Supeme Court found him unmistakably homophobic in 2012 and 2014. All these courts were commenting on Handshoe's fervent online attacks on Charles Leary and Vaughan Perret, a gay couple who run an acclaimed accommodation business in Nova Scotia. 

The court decision of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court that the Chronicle-Herald rightly reported on found the following about Handshoe:

The evidence presented establishes that Mr. Handshoe’s defamatory actions have continued unabated since Justice Hood’s order.  This is supported by the statement of claim which I must accept as proven.  The following is but a taste of the defamation plead:

•         Mr. Handshoe has continued to repeatedly publish words   referring to the personal plaintiffs as “girls”, “bitches”, “bottom boys”, “wives”, “perverted” and “queer fag scum.”

•         Mr. Handshoe has continued to publish that the applicants were long term recipients of criminal proceeds from the Broussard criminal scheme.

•        Trout Poitn Lodge was described by Mr. Handshoe as a shell company used for the purposes of a criminal conspiracy including money laundering.

•         The applicants were part of an international criminal conspiracy designed to silence the investigation of their own criminal wrongdoing.  Also that their Nova Scotia legal proceedings were criminally motivated and fraudulent.

•         The plaintiffs and Mr. Boussard illegally influenced the presiding Justice of the Supreme Court in Yarmouth to deprive Mr. Handshoe of his civil rights and due process.

•         Mr. Handshoe published that the applicants intentionally misled Justice Hood and therefore committed perjury.

•         The applicants were members of a Louisiana company involved in criminal activities alleged by American prosecutors.

•         Mr. Handshoe republished the following: “I'll add here, in case it is not self‑evident, that I built complete dossiers on all the players in this social group and I intend through time to roll out each and every one in excruciating detail as long as the lawsuit in Canada is an outstanding issue for Slabbed.  The reason for this is that this band of gay men act as a unit that will also scatter like cockroaches when the heat is applied.”

•         Mr. Handshoe created a video that was published on YouTube.  The content created the implication that the applicants were part of the Aaron Boussard criminal scandal, were involved in criminal activities with Broussard such as those alleged to have been conducted using Nova Scotia Enterprises, LLC, and that Trout Point Lodge was recipient of criminal monies and a place of criminal activity.  Handshoe referred to and pictured Broussard as the “Goatherder in Chief” and the Plaintiff’s as “the goatherders.”

Justice Kevin Coady determined Handshoe's words "have no relationship to fact or truth."

Notably, the settlement with the Canadian daily newspaper has resulted in no public retraction whatsoever of the article identifying Handshoe as homophobic that was central to Handshoe's purported legal case. The settlement came on the cusp of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision on gay marriage. In remarks in the Rose Garden, President Obama welcomed the decision, said the decision on gay marriage “affirms what millions of Americans already believe in their hearts.” “Today,” the President said, “we can say, in no uncertain terms, that we have made our union a little more perfect.” Handshoe and Slabbed appear to be like the Confederate flag, a remant of intolerance from a bygone era.

Handshoe's defamation lawsuit against the Toronto Star newspaper for its coverage of the same Nova Scotia court proceeding is still ongoing. An avid conspiracy theorist, Handshoe has also sued Loyola University Law School and a process server for an alleged conspiracy involving "a line of gay robots."

Slabbed declares bankruptcy! "Media" company run by homophobic CPA has no books or records

Slabbed New Media, the supposed sole-proprietor shell company of Douglas Handshoe, CPA, declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy on June 16, 2015, the same day the Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal denied Handshoe's motion for a reconsideration of its historic judgment reversing Handshoe's anti-SLAPP victory in the court of Judge Scott Schlegel.

Court documents show the company, which Handshoe claims operated the for-profit Slabbed blog, earned a paltry income in 2013. Despite Handshoe's self-reputed business acumen and financial experience, the company earned a profit of less than $900.00. Handshoe reported the LLCs revenue and expenses as part of his personal tax return that year. An accountant, Handshoe told the bankruptcy court today that Slabbed New Media has no books or financial records.

The bankruptcy filing raises numerous questions about Handshoe, and the bankruptcy's role in the various litigations in which the homophobic Handshoe remains enveloped.

For example, Handshoe now owes process server Chris Yount attorney's fees and costs for his failed attempt to have Yount's defamation and invasion of privacy lawsuit against him dismissed in Louisiana state court. Legal observers say that, given the appeal to the Fifth Circuit, the amount Handshoe owes to Yount could equal tens of thousands of dollars. In addition, Handshoe owes the same kind of fees and costs to civil rights attorney Daniel Abel, who also sued Handshoe for defamation. Handshoe lost anti-SLAPP dismissal motions against Abel as well. The ultimate value of a judgment against Handshoe in the Yount case could well be in the six figures, legal commentators say, given the nature of the alleged defamation, which involves allegedly flase allegation of child molestation and publication of a drawing the court of appeal labelled pornographic. Fact finding by the Fifth Circuit was not favorable for Handshoe or his attorney Jack "Bobby" Truitt.

The lack of financial records raises numerous questions about how exactly Handshoe used Slabbed New Media as part of his tax and litigation strategies.

More to come . . . 

Major defeat for homophobic Mississippi & Louisiana bloggers in ill-conceived anti-SLAPP motions: Louisiana 5th Circuit Court of Appeal says no to Doug Handshoe & lawyer Bobby Truitt, purveyors of "clickbait"

In a fourteen-page opinion rendered May 28, the Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal has handed a major defeat to homophobic bogger Douglas Handshoe of Mississippi and his inveterate attorney and frequent blog commenter Jack E. "Bobby" Truitt, a lawyer who practices from Covington, Louisiana. The appellate decision constitutes a major victory for victims of Internet harassment and online libel. The lawsuit also named Slabbed New Media, LLC, of which Handshoe's wife Jennifer Handshoe is reportedly an officer.

Last year, Handshoe had won a legal motion, having the libel case against him dismissed using a special motion to strike under Louisiana's Article 971, which protects commentary on public issues. The Plaintiffs, Chris Yount and his minor son appealed.

The appeal court unanimously reversed and remanded the decision of Judge Scott Schlegel in a case where civil process server Yount has sued Handshoe and Truitt for publishing defamatory comments on the blog Slabbed about Mr. Yount and his son. According to the allegations in the lawsuit, the comments were per se defamatory because they accused Yount of "innapropriate and and illegal sexual relations with the minor child," according to the decision. Handshoe had published that the drawing depicted a boy being sodomized by a "line of gay robots," and according to Yount's complaint, Truitt and Handshoe acted in concert to identify the child and to create defamatory innuendo on Slabbed. The Court repeatedly refers to the drawing as "pornographic." Handshoe has been identified as homophobic by courts in both the U.S. and Canada.

Yount's lawsuit will now go forward, and legal observers state that it could result in substantial damages being assessed against Handshoe and Truitt. The Court also ordered Judge Schlegel to award mandatory attorney's fees to Yount. Handshoe and Truitt also currently owe Daniel Abel attorney's fees as a result of their prior losses on anti-SLAPP special motions to strike in Abel's libel suit against them in New Orleans.

Yount is involved in a divorce case in Louisiana, and his only connection with Handshoe or Truitt had been to serve Handshoe with notice of civil lawsuits on several occasions, including from Trout Point Lodge in Nova Scotia, Canada, and Daniel Abel in Louisiana. Handshoe dug into the court file to find dirt on Yount, apparently in retaliation for being served.

"Captions and comments authored by Mr. Handshoe and Mr. Truitt underneath the drawing clearly identified the author as a minor child and the divorce proceedings in which he was involved," says the decision.  The Court continued

Mr. Handshoe argues that his publication of a pornographic drawing and evidence under seal from a private divorce proceedings was in connection with a public issue because: 1) his web site www.slabbed.org regularly breaks news and comments on "public issues" and 2) the blog posts dealt with publicly available information from court filings.

Handshoe was attempting to use Louisiana's anti-SLAPP legislation as a shield against being sued for targetting Yount with allegedly defamatory attacks. This mirrors his previous attempts--some succesful and some not--to block Nova Scotia Supreme Court decisions against him using the U.S. SPEECH Act. SLAPP stands for "strategic lawsuit against public participation." Handshoe has repeatedly referred to his numerous legal foes as "SLAPP happy nut jobs." Now, it appears the tables have turned.

The Fifth Circuit clearly and properly found there are limits on "free speech," even on the Internet, and that those injured online can seek redress through the courts. Louisiana's anti-SLAPP law will not be used to shield defendants like Doug Handshoe and Bobby Truitt from justice.

Judge Robert A. Chaisson clearly rejected as "absurd" the contention that one could seek the protection of the anti-SLAPP provisions simply because one is commenting on a judicial proceeding. In this regard, the Court cut no slack to Judge Schelgel or Handshoe & Truitt:

Under this reasoning, (which is the same interpretation used by the trial court), any cause of action arising from any written or oral statement made in connection with any kind of government activity or proceeding would be subject to special motions to strike regardless of whether or not the statements were made in connection with a public issue. Consequently, any party could defame or invade the privacy of a person involved in a divorce proceeding, traffic violation, child custody dispute, marriage, mortgage registration, passport application, or driver's license renewal  and be immunized from legal repercussions of damage to others through the use of an extraordinary procedural remedy.

 Flatly rejecting this reasoning and its application to the facts of the Yount case, Judge Chaisson drew a clear distinction between legimitate commentary on matter of true public interest, which is what anti-SLAPP laws should protect, and the kind of "private domestic matter" such as Yount's divorce.

Mr. Handshoe confuses the public right of access to judicial proceedings with the right to  free speech and petition. All of these rights are protected under the Constitutions of the United States  and Louisiana, by the express language of the statute,  but only actions arising under the latter rights  are protected by an Article 971 motion.   While information may be made available to the public for purposes of ensuring fairness in our judicial proceedings, there may be legal consequences should that same information be published and distributed as clickbait to millions of people on the internet in a manner that defames or invades the privacy of another. "The right to inspect judicial records should not trump the individual's privacy rights, especially where the purpose is to gratify spite, promote public scandal, or to publicize the embarrassing details of a divorce case." Copeland v. Copeland, 07-0177 (La. 10/16/07), 966 So.2d 1040,  1052.

Handshoe has sued Daniel Abel for "misrepresentation" under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act for serving a takedown notice on Handshoe's web host related to the pornographic drawing pursuant to a court order. Judge Chaisson's decisions seems to make clear that Abel was acting properly in serving the notice, and there was no misrepresentation. This could be a major blow to Handshoe's lawsuit in Mississippi federal court. In the same case, Handshoe also sued Loyola University Law School, which represented Yount's minor child in the appeal to the Fifth Circuit. Handshoe alleges Yount, Abel, and the Law School  engaged in "malicious prosecution" and "abuse of process" by suing him. One could conclude the true abuse of process and malicious prosecution may be being perpetrated by Handshoe and Slabbed New Media.

Handshoe's legal arguments in that federal court case now appear totally specious and unsubstaniated given the appeal court decision. Doubtless, the defendant will bring the Fifth Circuit decision to the attention of federal judge Starrett.

Handshoe also sued the Toronto Star and Halifax Chronicle-Herald newspapers for publicly identifying him as homophobic (despite the fact that the U.S. District Court in Gulport called him that in a decision). Hearings in all those cases are coming soon. Mr. Abel is slowly moving forward with his defamation action against Handshoe, Truitt, and Anne-Marie Vandenweghe. Trout Point Lodge and its owners are actively seeking enrollment of a copyright infringement judgment against Handshoe in Mississippi state court. They also have a substantial defamation judgment from Nova Scotia Supreme Court that could be enrolled in Mississippi at any time.

It looks like the proverbial walls are closing in on blogger Handshoe and his "promotion of public scandal."