Crystal Cox is NOT a Journalist

Just a sad and deluded woman

Posts tagged legal

0 notes &

Crystal Cox asks everyone to Dig Deep

yes Dig Deep, and not Dig Derp as some wags have suggested.

So we took her at her word, Dug Deep (in capitals no less) and found the same solid gold

It seems that Philly Law Blogger extraordinaire - Jordan Rushie seems to have also taken this advise from Crystal, and after a bout of investigative insomnia, found and presents to the world a whole lot more about Crystal Cox and her Dig Derp ways and it’s even in chronological order.

Though for a real in depth Deep Digging timeline of what Crystal has been up to these last 4 years, you cannot go past, well you can and will most likely have less nightmares because of it, Anonymous Insider’s amazingly well put together list of public documents.

Investigative Blogging - sleep not included! We Dig it!

Filed under Crystal Cox Bullshit extortion Derp timeline legal

0 notes &

Slashdot gets in on the situation

It seems that the Slashdot community has been rehashing the Crystal Cox situation with, as you would expect, a lot of comments about what is and isn’t Free Speech though very few actually agreeing with anything Crystal has done, and a majority calling for criminal sanctions.

In amongst the comments, we at CrystalsTumblingCox (yes we now have our own moniker - cool hey?) spotted a gem:

by droopus (33472) * on Tuesday April 03, @11:10PM (#39568267)

I had the dubious honor of having to deal with this piece of shit about two years ago.

Many years ago, I worked on a project called Movielink [] which was one of the first “download now, watch later” movie services, originally under the auspices of Sony Pictures. We launched a beta site in 2001, and I left to work on other projects.

Ten years later, I was contacted by one of the (ex) Sony Pictures folks, asking for help with a net stalker. All he had was a bunch of threatening emails, one of which had been sent from a standard mail client not Hush or a remailer. The IP was pretty easy, since it pointed to a group of properties (on one big plot) all owned by this Cox woman. (150 Grave Creek Rd, Eureka, MT 59917, 710 Grave Creek Rd, Eureka, MT 59917, 830 Grave Creek Rd Eureka, MT 59917) Once uncovered, she pulled out the stops and registered every possible permutation of my friend’s name with “fuck” preceding or appended to each name. She must have registered fifty domains, and was making ridiculous claims about patent theft, and directly asking my friend for money to “shut down her investigative efforts.”

We got lucky, I guess. In the cleartext email, she directly threatened my friend that she would “ruin him just for fun.” Since she was in court with Obsidian, I wrote an amicus (jailhouse lawyer, remember? B) and promised I would send it to the Court and Obsidian’s counsel the next day if she didn’t transfer every domain with my friends name to him immediately. No threats. We never heard from her again, but every domain was transferred to my friend.

Her site still tops her own Google results. Why is this still a civil issue?

Normally, we would regard this allegation with a skeptical eye, though with a bit of “investigative blogging” of our own, using Google search on the terms movielink and Crystal Cox, we discovered that the links shown have indeed been removed (though not all of them) and on face value their is reasonable proof that droopus is exactly whom they appear to be, someone who has had the dubious displeasure of dealing with Ms Cox.

Whoever droopus is we feel you and your friends anguish and are amazed that his and your mental state has not been affected. The alleged amicus brief that you wrote, would be an extremely interesting read and the public at large would be extremely grateful if it could somehow be provided without breaching any pre-existing agreements you had with Ms Cox.

Especially since the links in question regarding your friends name might of been removed (though sadly still exist under Google cache and Wayback machine) the posts referring to Movielink, Sony, and presumably your friends identity within there, most definitely still exist. It is up to you

As for your question droopus . Why indeed!

Filed under crystal cox slashdot extortion movielink Sony legal

0 notes &

How to defame in three easy steps

It seems that Law Professor Eric E Johnson of BlogLawBlog (say that three times backwards) wrote an interesting piece back in October 3rd, 2011 where he opined in regards to Obsidian Finance Group v. Cox, that

One way of thinking about this is that Cox’s unconventional style underminded her own credibility to an extent that the court was loathe to treat her allegations seriously enough to make them the basis of a libel case. I’m sorry if that’s harsh. (I know Ms. Cox will probably read this.) But that’s how I interpret the judge’s ruling.

Don’t be sorry Eric, it seems that her Style Of Capitalizing Every WORD for Emphasis and Boldness could be a form of OCD or just a great way to stop getting sued for defamation or charged with extortion by every single person who she classes as either a Whistleblower, Hitman, Enemy of the people, or whatever other description her tinfoil-addled brain can come up with.

Eric’s last paragraph is fantastic

So, I guess the lesson is that if you are going to defame someone, (1) put your foot on the gas, (2) put your pinky on the shift key, and (3) DON’T HOLD BACK! [emphasis not added]

For those wondering to what Eric is referring, here is an excerpt from the actual opinion by U.S. District Judge Marco A. Hernandez [pdf]

Defendant’s use of question marks and her references to proof that will allegedly occur in the future negate any tendency for her statements to be understood as provable assertions of fact. Her statements contain so little actual content that they do not assert, or imply, verifiable assertions of fact. They are, instead, statements of exaggerated subjective belief such that they cannot be proven true or false.

In other words, the Judge politely and with eloquence meant (in our opinion) that “due to her being batshit crazy no reasonable person would believe anything that vomited from her mouth, let alone web pages”

Oh dear, we seem to have forgotten to capitalize or bold words. The horror.

Filed under defamation Crystal Cox legal crazy

0 notes &

We have been reading Crystal Cox’s websites, yes we are masochists here, especially her latest blabbering on why “Judge Hernandez Calls for FBI Investigation, or tells me in a Hearing Weeks Before the Trial that he was Calling for an FBI Investigation.

Way to hedge your bets Crystal. He either called one or told you way before he told you. Ummm yeah ok.

Then the video, stating more people you have made web sites about, more allegations of Institutions conspiring against you (ie: University of Montana) and an interesting tidbit from you about how you are about to file a “Federal Hate Crime” allegation against certain individuals.

Then we spot a huge amount of links all talking about conflict of interests in regards to judges and how Crystal seems to think that somehow Judges need to sign some sort of statement stating they do not need to recuse themselves because you were Pro Se (representing yourself for those not versed in latin). Interestingly the first link in this list (from wikipedia) fully states in laypersons terms why and how Judges recuse themselves and the recourse available to a party if they have concerns. Though it looks like the “investigative blogger” loves links, just reading them in a comprehensive manner is beyond her responsibility or ability.

Then there is, lo and behold, a gift from Crystal to all do not have the financial wherewithal to purchase her transcripts of trial. We have now a copy of the day of the trial, and the day before the trial. Lots of reading to do now, for this we thank you Crystal, the world can now read for themselves what ACTUALLY happened and not just what you want us to know.

I will just leave you with this gem of brilliant grammatical logic from the mind of Crystal:

The Current Fire Storm Against Blogger Crystal Cox is Whistle Blower Retaliation, Plain and Simple. Thing is, I am NOT the Whistle Blower, I am the Investigative Blogger whom got the Whistle Blowers FOUND in the Search Engines. [ link ]

All we can say here is:

Filed under crystal cox legal extortion stupidity harrasment transcripts

0 notes &

Ugly New Reputation-Smearing Tactic: Going After A Toddler's Internet Footprint - Forbes

When Forbes starts using the word “fuck” and “sucks” in an article about extortion, blogging, and harassment of anyone who dares to criticize Crystal Cox, then you know there is going to be some interesting times ahead.

Kudos to Kashmir Hill for being what anyone would call a REAL Investigative reporter and blogger.

Filed under Forbes Crystal Cox extortion media sucks legal law