Newbies Beware: Gynecologist Is A Scam Artist!

[PacMan_2006]

I am not a lawyer but gabe has already admitted he owes cpu the cash. If the event (or any similar case) it would ever make to trial, the judge would order him to pay promptly and in a timely fashion per court documents stating a due date or payment plan etc.

Posting a person owes you money is not slander provided you have proof (oral/written/signed/all the above/some of the above). This would be like a person saying they "hate" their ex-spouse publicly - ah, that's why you're not with them anymore.

Looks like this thread continues to spew. :lol:

 

[CollegeFan]

Must be another graduate of the Alley McBeal TV College.....


A private person must only prove you acted negligently, which is to say that a "reasonable person" would not have published the defamatory statement.

A public figure must show "actual malice" - that you published with either knowledge of falsity or in reckless disregard for the truth.

Public figure: Politicians, Actors, etc. In other words, NOT anyone here.

Yeah, the burden of proof always falls on the person bringing the lawsuit.... no shit.... but once the plaintiff proves that it was a defamatory statement made negligently.... then the burden falls on the defendant to prove that his statement was made without malice, such as copy of his medical record showing the plaintiff to indeed be infected with Hepatitis. If you have no defense, you automatically lose. Got it?

Ummm, it's not as simple as you like to think. Did you get that info from a another mickey mouse website? It depends on state law, but here is a little excerpt of law for ya:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

In the context of defamation law, the doctrine of privilege relates to the element of a defamation claim requiring proof that publication of the allegedly defamatory statement was not made under privileged circumstances. [The elements of a common-law defamation claim, which includes both libel and slander, are: (1) a false and defamatory statement concerning another; (2) an unprivileged publication of the statement to a third party; (3) fault amounting to at least negligence on the part of the publisher; and (4) either actionability of the statement irrespective of special harm or the existence of special harm caused by the publication.] Qualified privilege, on the one hand, is available whenever publication is "'fairly made by a person in the discharge of some public or private duty, whether legal or moral, or in the conduct of his own affairs, in matters where his interest is concerned.'" Qualified privilege, however, can be overcome by a showing that publication was made with "actual malice," that is, with knowledge that the statement was false or with reckless disregard for whether it was false or not.

Hence, in the situation before us, "actual malice" needs to be shown.

Besides, like Jibba mentioned, defamation suits rarely win.

 

[Jibba]

See, it's irrational responses like this that has me convinced that you're not who you say you are. How is it "theft" is it wasn't his to begin with? Go look up the meaning of "referral bonus."

You're an idiot. Gyno agreed to pay. They made a verbal fucking contract at the least, and probably a written one with the emails. Cpu then had an interest in the money that was given to Gyno. Gyno then didn't pay. Stop fighting his battles or get a fucking room.

And you've lost the right to question who I am after showing yourself for the complete coward that you are by refusing to agree to my offer. Judging by your character though, I can't imagine you would have lived up to your end.

I've made several valid points which you continue to avoid like the plague. I've posed the same questions to real lawyers and they answered without a beat. I guess you must have trouble with them because they weren't covered on any Alley McBeal episode.

The article posted on Lawyers.com is a "stupid internet article"? I've actually got my current lawyer as a referral from that site. You sound like a Republican who dismisses a website rather than challenge the information, because they can't disupte it. A real lawyer can easily look up past case files, why don't you do the same.... as soon as you pass the bar.Backed off? Well, let me reinterate.... YOU'RE NOT A LAWYER. I hope that clears up any misunderstandings.

You are an utter moron. You have not made a single valid point. You've merely shown yourself for the mentally impotent, morally deficient buffoon that you are. And now you're lying through your teeth.

The article is a worthless rag. Go and find me a case and stop talking about what your friends say.

Now grow a sac and agree to the deal you blubbering coward. Your petty insults may work down at the fucking arcade, but they only make you look like a p**sy behind a computer to everyone in this thread.

No, your exact quote was "I WAS THE *****ONLY**** ONE TO RESPOND".... which makes it sound as if you did it out of pity. Believe me, I am a good capper and made lots of money betting on sports. I don't need strangers to pat me on my back and tell me I'm good. I'll leave that up to the amateurs.

Wah fuckin' wah. Cry me a river Mr. Sensitive. Man up and agree to my offer you fucking coward.

 

[Jibba]

Wow -- just read through this whole thread & I must admit -- I have enjoyed the Jibba-Crunch war more than the gyno "scam."

And for the record crunch -- jibba is right. You are dead wrong on your view of the law. You shouldn't give advice on something that you have no idea about. Also, no offense, but that website you got that ebay article from is definitely a mickey mouse site. Like jibba mentioned, that damn thing didn't even go to trial.

Anyway, my 2 cents -- Jibba is a stand-up guy and well-respected poster. For you to call him out on his career was pretty lame. But I don't know, maybe your life just sucks.

Have a nice day.

I loved every word of this post. Just to know that at least one single person out there sees this for what it is.

As for the back and forths, I hate getting into shit like this, but there are some battles that are just worth fighting . . . or too fun not to fight.

 

[Jibba]

Must be another graduate of the Alley McBeal TV College.....

A private person must only prove you acted negligently, which is to say that a "reasonable person" would not have published the defamatory statement.

A public figure must show "actual malice" - that you published with either knowledge of falsity or in reckless disregard for the truth.

Public figure: Politicians, Actors, etc. In other words, NOT anyone here.

Yeah, the burden of proof always falls on the person bringing the lawsuit.... no shit.... but once the plaintiff proves that it was a defamatory statement made negligently.... then the burden falls on the defendant to prove that his statement was made without malice, such as copy of his medical record showing the plaintiff to indeed be infected with Hepatitis. If you have no defense, you automatically lose. Got it?

First, you have not even made a prima facie case for defamation. The post in question was full of factual information, all of which is undisputed by Gyno. Your opinion on that is worthless and irrelevant. It was followed by a statement of opinion (which is constitutionally protected) that Gyno is a scammer. He had every reason to believe it and zero reason not to believe it. Additionally, Gyno has no damages. He did not have a business of referrals and has no right to have people sign up to a sportsbook through him. Both of these are requirements, and Gyno can't prove any of them. So shutup already.

Second, Gyno doesn't get to not pay his legitimate debts because he thinks he might have a case (which he absolutely does not). He has to pay up and then sue. Interest is building right now.

Ok . . . you may now continue on with your ignorant views on the law.

 

[Jibba]

Someone give me odds on this guy being Jibba's ghost. Hahahahahahahahaha!

I'll make you a second offer, since you were too much of a blubbering coward to accept the first. I'll not only prove that I am a lawyer, but we'll get a staff member to do an IP check on myself and CF. It seems every time you're proven wrong, you start crying like a bitch. Do you do this in real life too? With your "friends" the lawyers? :lol:

 

[crunch99]

Ummm, it's not as simple as you like to think. Did you get that info from a another mickey mouse website? It depends on state law, but here is a little excerpt of law for ya:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

In the context of defamation law, the doctrine of privilege relates to the element of a defamation claim requiring proof that publication of the allegedly defamatory statement was not made under privileged circumstances. [The elements of a common-law defamation claim, which includes both libel and slander, are: (1) a false and defamatory statement concerning another; (2) an unprivileged publication of the statement to a third party; (3) fault amounting to at least negligence on the part of the publisher; and (4) either actionability of the statement irrespective of special harm or the existence of special harm caused by the publication.] Qualified privilege, on the one hand, is available whenever publication is "'fairly made by a person in the discharge of some public or private duty, whether legal or moral, or in the conduct of his own affairs, in matters where his interest is concerned.'" Qualified privilege, however, can be overcome by a showing that publication was made with "actual malice," that is, with knowledge that the statement was false or with reckless disregard for whether it was false or not.

Hence, in the situation before us, "actual malice" needs to be shown.

Besides, like Jibba mentioned, defamation suits rarely win.

Leave it to a complete moron to copy/paste some law that he has absolutely no understanding of.

Some categories of statements are considered to be defamatory per se, such that people making a defamation claim for these statements do not need to prove that the statement was defamatory. In the common law tradition, damages for such statements are presumed and do not have to be proven.

Traditionally, these per se defamatory statements include:

Allegations or imputations "injurious to another in their trade, business, or profession"

Allegations or imputations "of loathsome disease" (historically leprosy and sexually transmitted disease, now also including mental illness)

Allegations or imputations of "unchastity" (usually only in unmarried people and sometimes only in women)

Allegations or imputations of criminal activity

Now tell me how "The cook has Hepatitis" or "Gyn is a SCAM ARTIST" are not defamatory statements.

 

[Jibba]

Leave it to a complete moron to copy/paste some law that he has absolutely no understanding of.

That's what we've been saying all along. :missingte

 

[crunch99]

You're an idiot. Gyno agreed to pay. They made a verbal fucking contract at the least, and probably a written one with the emails. Cpu then had an interest in the money that was given to Gyno. Gyno then didn't pay. Stop fighting his battles or get a fucking room.

Another moronic statement by the fake lawyer. Do you honestly think if OP were to sue, any judge in the US would enforce their "contract" considering it stems from an ILLEGAL ACTIVITY?

And you've lost the right to question who I am after showing yourself for the complete coward that you are by refusing to agree to my offer. Judging by your character though, I can't imagine you would have lived up to your end.

Agree to what? The issue is dead as far as I'm concerned. I am 100% convinced that you're not who you say you are. I know it, you know, others reading know it. Stop whining and move on.

You are an utter moron. You have not made a single valid point. You've merely shown yourself for the mentally impotent, morally deficient buffoon that you are. And now you're lying through your teeth.

I've made plenty of valid points. Just because you can't answer them does not make them invalid. A real lawyer would've answered them.

The article is a worthless rag. Go and find me a case and stop talking about what your friends say.

Right..... Lawyers.com is a worthless site. Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Now grow a sac and agree to the deal you blubbering coward. Your petty insults may work down at the fucking arcade, but they only make you look like a p**sy behind a computer to everyone in this thread.

What insults? "You're not a lawyer" is not an insult. It's FACT.

Wah fuckin' wah. Cry me a river Mr. Sensitive. Man up and agree to my offer you fucking coward.

Sensitive? Like I said, I couldn't care less who posts in my picks thread.... but it seems like you're the one upset because I ignored you.

 

[crunch99]

First, you have not even made a prima facie case for defamation. The post in question was full of factual information, all of which is undisputed by Gyno. Your opinion on that is worthless and irrelevant. It was followed by a statement of opinion (which is constitutionally protected) that Gyno is a scammer. He had every reason to believe it and zero reason not to believe it. Additionally, Gyno has no damages. He did not have a business of referrals and has no right to have people sign up to a sportsbook through him. Both of these are requirements, and Gyno can't prove any of them. So shutup already.

Second, Gyno doesn't get to not pay his legitimate debts because he thinks he might have a case (which he absolutely does not). He has to pay up and then sue. Interest is building right now.

Ok . . . you may now continue on with your ignorant views on the law.

Right, defendants are never allowed to countersue.... hahahahahahahaha! Gyn' ability to get future referrals was stripped away due to the defamatory remarks of OP, who apparently spammed every board he frequents. Maybe the next time you decide to play lawyer, you should educate yourself about the law first.

 

[Jibba]

You are a blubbering coward Crunch. Do I need to start another thread to call out your sorry ass for being such a p*ssy? You want to talk shit and be a scumbag, then accept it when you're called out on it.

Lawyers.com ... you fucking imbecile.

 

[Jibba]

Right, defendants are never allowed to countersue.... hahahahahahahaha! Gyn' ability to get future referrals was stripped away due to the defamatory remarks of OP, who apparently spammed every board he frequents. Maybe the next time you decide to play lawyer, you should educate yourself about the law.

There's no lawsuit you moron.

 

[crunch99]

I'll make you a second offer, since you were too much of a blubbering coward to accept the first. I'll not only prove that I am a lawyer, but we'll get a staff member to do an IP check on myself and CF. It seems every time you're proven wrong, you start crying like a bitch. Do you do this in real life too? With your "friends" the lawyers? :lol:

Right, because there are no softwares that mask one's true IP..... hahahahahahahahahahahaha!

 

[crunch99]

You are a blubbering coward Crunch. Do I need to start another thread to call out your sorry ass for being such a p*ssy? You want to talk shit and be a scumbag, then accept it when you're called out on it.

Lawyers.com ... you fucking imbecile.

Do whatever you'd like. I would certainly expect that from a fraud that got exposed. Go ahead, defend your Rx life. Hahahahahahahahahaha!
</p>Btw, Lawyers.com features many, many real lawyers, much more qualified than a fake one playing one on some public BB. Not surprised that you're not part of it.

 

[Jibba]

Right, because there are no softwares that mask one's true IP..... hahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Continue it here you pathetic coward.

 

[United]

My view on the situation:

1. It should have never gotten this far. G should have paid up
immediatley.

2. I think C should have emailed G and warned him that he
was going to start a thread about it unless he was paid.

3. Then if C still didn't get his due then post the matter.

Lesson learned that you shouldn't trust anybody over the internet especially when money is involved.

 

[sl55]

Was this a scam or it was it god awful business?Back in January gyno put the same deal on the table with me.
Put 2 dimes in ***** and the referral fee of 22%,I'll split with you.Not a bad deal for anybody...220 to gyno....220 to me...and the book is happy with another deposit which they must need offering 22%.Actually pretty shrewd on gynos part.10 of these and you have a quick 2200.To this point not a scam at all.I did'nt jump on this for two reasons,1 being,I don't cut deals on the internet with nameless/faceless people and #2,I was still pissed about the ballbashing I took from millenium.
The only way this was a scam with cpu is if gyno knew right from the start that he had no intention of paying the guy.
If in fact gyno was counting on his gambling winnings to pay this guy,then he is just one stupid ass businessman.

Bottom line is either gyno scammed or he rolled the dice and lost.There is no gray area here,to save face gyno needs to pay the guy on the terms of the original deal period with no arbritary deductions decided by gyno.
Gyno and only gyno knows what his intentions were.

 

[WVU]

It sounds like Gyno could have used a crash course in the WVU technique of pilfering money from offshore joints.

 

[Rev_Al]

Was this a scam or it was it god awful business?Back in January gyno put the same deal on the table with me.
Put 2 dimes in ***** and the referral fee of 22%,I'll split with you.Not a bad deal for anybody...220 to gyno....220 to me...and the book is happy with another deposit which they must need offering 22%.Actually pretty shrewd on gynos part.10 of these and you have a quick 2200.To this point not a scam at all.I did'nt jump on this for two reasons,1 being,I don't cut deals on the internet with nameless/faceless people and #2,I was still pissed about the ballbashing I took from millenium.
The only way this was a scam with cpu is if gyno knew right from the start that he had no intention of paying the guy.
If in fact gyno was counting on his gambling winnings to pay this guy,then he is just one stupid ass businessman.

Bottom line is either gyno scammed or he rolled the dice and lost.There is no gray area here,to save face gyno needs to pay the guy on the terms of the original deal period with no arbritary deductions decided by gyno.
Gyno and only gyno knows what his intentions were.

Ok...i guess i'm the only one who's baffled here...but how does Gyno have the ability to contact posters, when they're about to deposit w/ a book?

Did I not receive the pamphlet on 'How to capitalize on posters' when I signed up here...lol...sounds like a good scheme. Just curious.

 

[bigbet1234]

:hahahahah

You have issues. Seriously