9 ms·

Letter To Jennifer Allen Regarding False And Defamatory Statements

54 points by Pasanpr 14y ago

marcamillion 14y ago
Wow...this is pretty damning stuff. I wonder how all the 'pilers on' will respond. I assume an apology is in order. Edit: I never knew anything much about this Loren figure, aside from the video....but I definitely will never trust anything he has to say again. As for Calacanis....was never a fan of his to begin with. I get that Michael is abrasive, pushy and can sometimes be a dick to people he works with. I don't know him personally, but it is just pathetic to see how opportunistic his detractors are. I mean....what grade are these guys in? This is stuff you would expect from a middle school crowd. Only to know that these guys are grown-ass men. shakes head
- devindotcom 14y ago
  I'm really wondering how Chen and Gawker will be able to spin this. Really should have done this background work to begin with for such a serious allegation.
  - 23david 13y ago
    Not sure that it's appropriate for you to be commenting without a clear disclaimer that you're a writer for Techcrunch. Conflict of interest perhaps? Your profile says: 'writer, nbc news & techcrunch'.
- ajross 14y ago
  I'm not sure any of this is "damning" really. It's mostly nitpicking at facts (e.g. the time of their last contact) which aren't material to a rape accusation. Really I don't understand what Arrington has to gain here. If these are actual facts relevant to a criminal defense, posting them on the internet like this is insane. So clearly they think there will be no trial, so they're slinging mud... just to rub it in? I don't see how this improves his image. It's just a mess all around.
  - OGinparadise 14y ago
    Maybe he doesn't fear a criminal trial, he fears his reputation being lost. So clearly they think there will be no trial, so they're slinging mud... just to rub it in? Someone accused him of being a rapist. What should he do, buy a CNN spot hailing the accusations?
    - ajross 13y ago
      This is inside-the-echo-chamber logic. People outside the techcrunch bubble aren't going to read that whole thing (seriously: that's a huge page!). What they are going to see is yet another story in the mainstream media about the "controversy" about whether or not Arrington raped this woman. See the very-different-in-tone coverage on sites like talkingpointsmemo.com for a good example. How does that help his reputation?
      - ebrenes 13y ago
        Because someone who does read the story is going to then make a summary and that will spread. Which is the nature of news nowadays where tl;dr is the norm and people summarize nuanced and complex topics into little zingers.
  - uid 14y ago
    > I'm not sure any of this is "damning" really. How about the part where he was in another state on the night she says he raped her? Or the part where she left a comment on Gawker stating that he has been previously charged with rape and went to trial but got off because he knew the judge Or the part where she deleted evidence on Facebook? Or the part where she told Gawker that she hadn't been in contact with him since the rape but he shows a large number of messages in a pattern of obsession Or the part where every other person who is familiar with the two of them denies even seeing a hint of abuse Or the part where she has previously made a false accusation, of being pregnant, in order to get him to respond to her Actually, did you read the post? This is as damming as you can get when defending yourself from a false rape accusation. I can't imagine what else somebody in that situation could do. He is lucky he was able to track down all this information online, otherwise we could have seen an innocent man convicted. This woman is unreliable. She also accused Arrington of hacking into Robert Scoble's Facebook account and posting as him to defend Arrington. We should have seen through this at that point, that it had to come to this is an indictment of our culture and the willingness of a few to take advantage of an unstable woman to promote their own self interest.
duck 14y ago
The world is going to really suck when things like this get played out in social media and blog posts each and every time.
- hellopat 14y ago
  It's already happening.
DanBC 14y ago
I think a "No names, no reporting, until a conviction" rule would be really good. It'd encourage more women to report rape. It'd help to protect men from false allegations of rape. (Because here the reputation damage is crippling).
- Korvin 14y ago
  Currently, at least in my state, the laws are very publicly guilty until proven innocent when it comes to sexual abuse. It is this way to prevent further harm to others or something like that. Having been through something like this I can say that that would not do anything to protect the majority of wrongfully accused persons.
- InclinedPlane 14y ago
  In the US at least you can go to a hospital and have a "rape kit" performed, anonymously and free of charge, where the evidence will be kept on file should you desire to press charges in the future. It's probably a good idea for any woman who has been raped to take advantage of that, regardless of what they may decide to do later.
gamblor956 14y ago
As in all defamation cases, it is Ms. Allen's job to prove that the allegedly defamatory statements (the accusation of rape) were true and the photo is a significant obstacle for her to overcome. From an evidentiary perspective, the facebook page of the photo proves nothing other than that the photo was uploaded from a mobile device on March 6. Nothing else in the information provided indicates when the photo was taken, but it would be reasonable to infer that it was uploaded contemporaneously with being taken. OTOH, by posting the photos from the "For only you" email chain, Arrington's lawyers may have breached her right to privacy with regards to those photos. (According to the lawyer's bio, he's an expert at business litigation, IP, and unfair competition and those are the firm's primary practice areas...but not defamation or other non-business torts. http://www.bgrfirm.com/attorneys/eric-m-george/. http://www.bgrfirm.com/attorneys/eric-m-george/.) This is why you hire lawyers that are experienced in their field. Experience in one area of law does not necessarily transfer to other areas of law. It's also quite odd that Arrington lives in Washington, the events at issue allegedly took place in SF Bay Area, but the lawyer and his firm...are located in LA. Clients rarely, if ever hire non-local attorneys to handle their legal matters--especially non-local attorneys who are not experts at handling the legal issues at hand.
- othermaciej 14y ago
  > As in all defamation cases, it is Ms. Allen's job to prove that the allegedly defamatory statements (the accusation of rape) were true and the photo is a significant obstacle for her to overcome. That's not the case under US libel and defamation law. As with any other tort, the plaintiff has the burden of proof (and thus must prove, among other elements of the tort, that the statement was false). The UK and some other jurisdictions have a reversed burden of proof for defamation or libel, but not the US.
  - gamblor956 14y ago
    I left work before I realized I left out the part about truth being Ms. Allen's burden because it is her defense to defamation. (In US law, once the plaintiff has made a prima facie showing of their case, the burden shifts back to the defendant to prove their defense.) Common elements of defamation in US law: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact concerning another person or entity; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault on the part of the person making the statement amounting to intent or at least negligence; and 4) some harm caused to the person or entity who is the subject of the statement. Mr. Arrington has made a prima facie showing of the elements of defamation. (This doesn't mean that he's proven his case, since that is a factual determination by a judge or jury. It simply means that he appears to have shown sufficient evidence of each element that the factfinder could find for him.) I leave it to you to read the massive of wall of text to see how each element is met. Truth is a defense to defamation, under American law. Thus, it is now Ms. Allen's job to prove the truth of the allegedly defamatory statements. In this regard, the photo is a significant obstacle to overcome in showing the truth of her statements, if, as suggested, she was several hundred miles away from the plaintiff at the time of the alleged incident.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
OGinparadise 14y ago
Looks very detailed. Let this be another reminder to wait before assuming every accusation is true. Especially in rape cases the damage is done the minute allegations are spread. Mike has made many enemies, and by all accounts he is a d*ck but those ex-friends of his that used this case to get even with him are blacklisted forever in my mind.
ChuckMcM 13y ago
I'm struck by the similar tone in Jennifer's statements and those of Shirley Hornstein [1]. I am also struck by the way these folks interact with the rest of the community. I went to school in LA (Univ. of So. Calif) which has a lot of connections with the movie business (and Hollywood in general). There were lots of people who were desperate to be "part of the action" and were willing to set aside a number of principles in order to achieve that. I thought it was nice that technical people weren't like that. Then in the dot.com boom we were overrun with MBAs who had decided we were too stupid to pick the money up off the floor. They went around destroying things with rent-seeking monetization models and other schemes to defraud those who didn't understand what they were buying (or being charged for). Now we have people more like the Hollywood groupies and less like the MBA types. I guess that is a side effect of hiring "rockstars" (har har har) but really? Is this some weird revenge desire of the socialites in high school trying to make up for the fact they shunned nerds in favor of football players or something? If you had said you could make a Silicon Valley soap opera I would have laughed at you, but apparently you can make one now (except it would be based in San Francisco I suppose). Strange times indeed. [1] http://shirls.me/post/41790389190/shirley-hornstein-no-more-lies http://shirls.me/post/41790389190/shirley-hornstein-no-more-...

54 points by Pasanpr 14y ago

Wow...this is pretty damning stuff. I wonder how all the 'pilers on' will respond. I assume an apology is in order. Edit: I never knew anything much about this Loren figure, aside from the video....but I definitely will never trust anything he has to say again. As for Calacanis....was never a fan of his to begin with. I get that Michael is abrasive, pushy and can sometimes be a dick to people he works with. I don't know him personally, but it is just pathetic to see how opportunistic his detractors are. I mean....what grade are these guys in? This is stuff you would expect from a middle school crowd. Only to know that these guys are grown-ass men. shakes head

devindotcom 14y ago
I'm really wondering how Chen and Gawker will be able to spin this. Really should have done this background work to begin with for such a serious allegation.
- 23david 13y ago
  Not sure that it's appropriate for you to be commenting without a clear disclaimer that you're a writer for Techcrunch. Conflict of interest perhaps? Your profile says: 'writer, nbc news & techcrunch'.
ajross 14y ago
I'm not sure any of this is "damning" really. It's mostly nitpicking at facts (e.g. the time of their last contact) which aren't material to a rape accusation. Really I don't understand what Arrington has to gain here. If these are actual facts relevant to a criminal defense, posting them on the internet like this is insane. So clearly they think there will be no trial, so they're slinging mud... just to rub it in? I don't see how this improves his image. It's just a mess all around.
- OGinparadise 14y ago
  Maybe he doesn't fear a criminal trial, he fears his reputation being lost. So clearly they think there will be no trial, so they're slinging mud... just to rub it in? Someone accused him of being a rapist. What should he do, buy a CNN spot hailing the accusations?
  - ajross 13y ago
    This is inside-the-echo-chamber logic. People outside the techcrunch bubble aren't going to read that whole thing (seriously: that's a huge page!). What they are going to see is yet another story in the mainstream media about the "controversy" about whether or not Arrington raped this woman. See the very-different-in-tone coverage on sites like talkingpointsmemo.com for a good example. How does that help his reputation?
    - ebrenes 13y ago
      Because someone who does read the story is going to then make a summary and that will spread. Which is the nature of news nowadays where tl;dr is the norm and people summarize nuanced and complex topics into little zingers.
- uid 14y ago
  > I'm not sure any of this is "damning" really. How about the part where he was in another state on the night she says he raped her? Or the part where she left a comment on Gawker stating that he has been previously charged with rape and went to trial but got off because he knew the judge Or the part where she deleted evidence on Facebook? Or the part where she told Gawker that she hadn't been in contact with him since the rape but he shows a large number of messages in a pattern of obsession Or the part where every other person who is familiar with the two of them denies even seeing a hint of abuse Or the part where she has previously made a false accusation, of being pregnant, in order to get him to respond to her Actually, did you read the post? This is as damming as you can get when defending yourself from a false rape accusation. I can't imagine what else somebody in that situation could do. He is lucky he was able to track down all this information online, otherwise we could have seen an innocent man convicted. This woman is unreliable. She also accused Arrington of hacking into Robert Scoble's Facebook account and posting as him to defend Arrington. We should have seen through this at that point, that it had to come to this is an indictment of our culture and the willingness of a few to take advantage of an unstable woman to promote their own self interest.

duck 14y ago

The world is going to really suck when things like this get played out in social media and blog posts each and every time.

hellopat 14y ago
It's already happening.

DanBC 14y ago

I think a "No names, no reporting, until a conviction" rule would be really good. It'd encourage more women to report rape. It'd help to protect men from false allegations of rape. (Because here the reputation damage is crippling).

Korvin 14y ago
Currently, at least in my state, the laws are very publicly guilty until proven innocent when it comes to sexual abuse. It is this way to prevent further harm to others or something like that. Having been through something like this I can say that that would not do anything to protect the majority of wrongfully accused persons.
InclinedPlane 14y ago
In the US at least you can go to a hospital and have a "rape kit" performed, anonymously and free of charge, where the evidence will be kept on file should you desire to press charges in the future. It's probably a good idea for any woman who has been raped to take advantage of that, regardless of what they may decide to do later.

gamblor956 14y ago

As in all defamation cases, it is Ms. Allen's job to prove that the allegedly defamatory statements (the accusation of rape) were true and the photo is a significant obstacle for her to overcome. From an evidentiary perspective, the facebook page of the photo proves nothing other than that the photo was uploaded from a mobile device on March 6. Nothing else in the information provided indicates when the photo was taken, but it would be reasonable to infer that it was uploaded contemporaneously with being taken. OTOH, by posting the photos from the "For only you" email chain, Arrington's lawyers may have breached her right to privacy with regards to those photos. (According to the lawyer's bio, he's an expert at business litigation, IP, and unfair competition and those are the firm's primary practice areas...but not defamation or other non-business torts. http://www.bgrfirm.com/attorneys/eric-m-george/. http://www.bgrfirm.com/attorneys/eric-m-george/.) This is why you hire lawyers that are experienced in their field. Experience in one area of law does not necessarily transfer to other areas of law. It's also quite odd that Arrington lives in Washington, the events at issue allegedly took place in SF Bay Area, but the lawyer and his firm...are located in LA. Clients rarely, if ever hire non-local attorneys to handle their legal matters--especially non-local attorneys who are not experts at handling the legal issues at hand.

othermaciej 14y ago
> As in all defamation cases, it is Ms. Allen's job to prove that the allegedly defamatory statements (the accusation of rape) were true and the photo is a significant obstacle for her to overcome. That's not the case under US libel and defamation law. As with any other tort, the plaintiff has the burden of proof (and thus must prove, among other elements of the tort, that the statement was false). The UK and some other jurisdictions have a reversed burden of proof for defamation or libel, but not the US.
- gamblor956 14y ago
  I left work before I realized I left out the part about truth being Ms. Allen's burden because it is her defense to defamation. (In US law, once the plaintiff has made a prima facie showing of their case, the burden shifts back to the defendant to prove their defense.) Common elements of defamation in US law: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact concerning another person or entity; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault on the part of the person making the statement amounting to intent or at least negligence; and 4) some harm caused to the person or entity who is the subject of the statement. Mr. Arrington has made a prima facie showing of the elements of defamation. (This doesn't mean that he's proven his case, since that is a factual determination by a judge or jury. It simply means that he appears to have shown sufficient evidence of each element that the factfinder could find for him.) I leave it to you to read the massive of wall of text to see how each element is met. Truth is a defense to defamation, under American law. Thus, it is now Ms. Allen's job to prove the truth of the allegedly defamatory statements. In this regard, the photo is a significant obstacle to overcome in showing the truth of her statements, if, as suggested, she was several hundred miles away from the plaintiff at the time of the alleged incident.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

OGinparadise 14y ago

Looks very detailed. Let this be another reminder to wait before assuming every accusation is true. Especially in rape cases the damage is done the minute allegations are spread. Mike has made many enemies, and by all accounts he is a d*ck but those ex-friends of his that used this case to get even with him are blacklisted forever in my mind.

ChuckMcM 13y ago

I'm struck by the similar tone in Jennifer's statements and those of Shirley Hornstein [1]. I am also struck by the way these folks interact with the rest of the community. I went to school in LA (Univ. of So. Calif) which has a lot of connections with the movie business (and Hollywood in general). There were lots of people who were desperate to be "part of the action" and were willing to set aside a number of principles in order to achieve that. I thought it was nice that technical people weren't like that. Then in the dot.com boom we were overrun with MBAs who had decided we were too stupid to pick the money up off the floor. They went around destroying things with rent-seeking monetization models and other schemes to defraud those who didn't understand what they were buying (or being charged for). Now we have people more like the Hollywood groupies and less like the MBA types. I guess that is a side effect of hiring "rockstars" (har har har) but really? Is this some weird revenge desire of the socialites in high school trying to make up for the fact they shunned nerds in favor of football players or something? If you had said you could make a Silicon Valley soap opera I would have laughed at you, but apparently you can make one now (except it would be based in San Francisco I suppose). Strange times indeed. [1] http://shirls.me/post/41790389190/shirley-hornstein-no-more-lies http://shirls.me/post/41790389190/shirley-hornstein-no-more-...