© Matthew Forsythe
Otherwise known as cyber bullying, sometimes known as cyberstalking, it is an epidemic as at least 40% of our population has posted something at some time. "Google Yourself" is very virgin territory. What happens when you do and you see shocking things about you? Ask Gene Cooley, he did not even own a computer so it took a painfully long time for him to find out about the devastating remarks.
Read more at the website of the North County Gazette
.
Something doesn’t seem right about this article. This topic caught my eye because of a project I am currently working on so I tried to find some relevant facts about this trial. Instead, I found no trial was ever scheduled or held. I did find a case study for Dolen V. Ryals that was listed on Citmedialaw.org [Link]where the case docs were provided. This article is not even remotely similar to what is represented by the litigation. From what I could tell, the pro se litigant failed to ever substantiate what appear to be haphazard and tenuous allegations. Each of the plaintiff’s pleadings appear to be conjured and inconsistent (putting it nicely), and nowhere in the docs is any supportive material to the claims. Blame and allegations shifted from one defendant to another and then back and forth again as the claimant continued to amend and refile the case. In one instance this plaintiff made false factual allegations that a near 90 year old woman cyberstalked her. In the 1st amended complaint Plaintiff Deborah Dolen demanded that criminal charges be brought and also demanded the court to imprisonment ALL defendants for five years, including this one. It was stated in the defendants’ answers that none of them ever had any indication who this plaintiff was prior to the lawsuit against them, but this one woman in particular that was being sued for cyberstalking not only didn’t know who the plaintiff was, she did not own or know how to use a computer!
In an order dated 2/24/2011, the court describes this plaintiff Deborah Dolen’s action as torturous and denies further amendments. What is clearly defined in the court docs is that defendants named in this article had been previously dropped from the case in mid 2010 and after a hearing on the pleadings they were dismissed from the action with prejudice to any further claims against them. Odd that all this was absent from the subjectively written article. Then again, maybe not so odd, as it says a lot.
I found no similarity to the Cooley case this one is being compared to either. Unlike the Cooley case, this plaintiff (Deborah Dolen), according to record has been a repeat offender, is a seasoned veteran of the penal system, and is a convicted felon. She is also no stranger to filing baseless litigation. In the 2/24/2011 PDF court order on Citmedialaw, it addresses fair use of her criminal history being used in this case. Again, odd that all this was also absent from the subjectively written article. Then again, maybe not so odd, as it says a lot.
After read the case history, doing a little Google homework, and putting together some pieces to this puzzle from other information found online, I would guess that the case plaintiff Deborah Dolen aka Mabel White may have been the author and reporter of this article as a means to try and seek further attention with her claim of being “cyberstalked”. If the intent and purpose of this article is to hoax and misinform the public in the way it appears to be, it makes me wonder: Who’s the real bully here?