I don’t write this blog to “win friends,” although I have it on good authority that it has “influence[d at least one or two] people.”<\/p>\n
I also don’t get paid enough for writing this blog to investigate and have an opinion on whether or not Crystal Cox in fact falsely defamed<\/a>\u00a0Kevin D. Padrick and Obsidian Finance Group and earned the $2.5 million judgment entered against her by an Oregon federal district court. I will say, however, that as someone who has himself Fought the Power for no pay and got himself slapped silly<\/a> and called crazy for his efforts, I probably tend more than most to give the benefit of the doubt to people who conceive of themselves the same way.<\/p>\n Cox has been accused of attempting to Extort the plaintiffs in the above-mentioned case, first (in so many words) by the judge in his opinion denying her motion for a new trial<\/a> and now by a whole slew of media relying on that opinion. She has also been accused by some of the same media of similarly attempting to Extort Marco Randazza, a First Amendment attorney who apparently in the recent past communicated with her about possibly representing her post-judgment in the Oregon defamation case. Those discussions obviously at some point went very very sour. For purposes of this post, however, I’m going to set aside these allegations of attempted Extortion, for a few reasons: First, as a criminal defense attorney I prefer my allegations of criminal conduct proved in a court of law beyond a reasonable doubt. Second, at least with regard to the first of the two alleged instances of attempted Extortion, it’s<\/a> surprising<\/a> how much “Settlement Negotiations” can sometimes resemble Extortion. Third, it’s not really relevant to what I want to talk about here in this post.<\/p>\n Fourth, Cox bought marcrandazza dot com for $10 (as well as other domains that include Marco’s last name) and is blogging there about, among other things, why she did so, the allegations of attempted Extortion, and her perceptions of the origins of her War with Randazza. (Short version: He started it.) Check it out for her side of the story. The other side of the story<\/a> is all over the internet.<\/p>\n What I want to write about here is the unwarranted and troubling expansion by some of the “criticism” being directed at Cox to encompass Eugene Volokh, the UCLA law prof and blawger extraordinaire who is representing her on appeal to the Ninth Circuit<\/a>.<\/p>\n On second thought, screw it: I’ve already written about this elsewhere. (Like I said, I don’t get paid enough to write this blog.) See Marco’s comment at Popehat<\/a>, where he wrote “If this thing goes to the 9th Circuit, I’m afraid it will be an ego trip and not a real desire to clean up the state of the law,” and my comments following; Marco’s comment at his own blog<\/a>, where he wrote that I was “understanding it incorrectly,” and my replies thereto; and my comment this morning at The Salty Droid<\/a>.<\/p>\n As for the mention of Joseph Rakofsky and “Internet Mobbing” in the title of this post: I note that Marco is defending a number of blawgers in a civil suit filed by Rakofsky in which Rakofsky has alleged<\/a>, among other things, a cause of action for “internet mobbing.”<\/a> I note that Cox appears to constitute all by herself a One-Woman Internet Mob. I note that she is now characterizing on her marcrandazza dot com blog those who are up in arms against her as a “Lynch Mob.”<\/p>\n