🚀 go-pugleaf

RoddricknSusanne@gmail.com  wrote in
news:afpho799r6e01t15gtats81pdkeu4p71im@4ax.com: 

http://tinyurl.com/GROSVENORBLOWS 
http://tinyurl.com/GROSVENORSUCKS 

William Grosvenor, MD (Manic Deadbeat) 
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada 

"[Grosvenor�s] misconduct can be characterized as highly 
reprehensible misconduct..." (Ratushny, J.) 

"Grosvenor...has a criminal record for assault and extortion, 
[and] was diagnosed at Riverview Psychiatric Hospital in 
British Columbia in 1973 as suffering from a paranoid 
personality disorder..." (Alberta Report) 

"William GROSVENOR, hereinafter called "the accused", was 
tried under Part (XVI) of the Criminal Code upon the 
charge that he the accused between the 13th day of 
February, A.D. 1970 and the 16th day of February, A.D. 
1970 both days inclusive, in the City of Prince Rupert, 
in the Province of British Columbia, without reasonable 
justification or excuse and with intent to extort money 
by threatening to prosecute Campbell McLEOD with an 
offense under the Companies Act of the Province of British 
Columbia, UNLAWFULLY attempted to induce the said Campbell 
McLEOD to pay him, the said William GROSVENOR, the sum 
of Fifty Dollars ($50.00), CONTRARY TO THE FORM OF 
STATUTE IN SUCH CASE MADE AND PROVIDED: was convicted of 
the said offense..." (McADAM, J.) 

Warman v. Grosvenor, 2008 CanLII 57728 (ON SC): 

Liability

[51]      I am satisfied on a balance of probabilities 
from the facts deemed admitted and from the further 
evidence at trial that each of the essential elements 
comprising the torts of defamation and assault has been roved 
as having been committed by the defendant.  I do not find, 
however, that the plaintiff is able to recover damages for a 
tort of invasion of privacy.

Defamation

[52]      In Botiuk v. Toronto Free Press Publications Ltd., 
1995 CanLII 60 (SCC), [1995] 3 S.C.R. 3 (S.C.C.), Cory J. 
said, at para. 62,

   [A] publication which tends to lower a person in the 
estimation of right-thinking members of society, or to expose 
a person to hatred, contempt or ridicule, is defamatory and will 
attract liability�What is defamatory may be determined from the 
ordinary meaning of the published words themselves or from the 
surrounding circumstances. 
                   
[53]      The tort of defamation consists of the two torts 
of libel and slander.  The law of libel and slander protects 
an individual�s reputation.  Libel is any publication of 
defamatory material.  The law presumes that the words are 
false unless and until the defendant proves the contrary.  
In order to succeed in his defamatory action, the plaintiff 
must establish each of the following three elements on a 
balance of probabilities:  (1) the words are defamatory; (2) 
the words are published; (3) the plaintiff is the person 
defamed: Rainaldi, Remedies in Tort, looseleaf (Carswell, 2006), at pp. 
6-20.

[54]      With respect to the first element, the Postings 
on the various websites and with the various website groups 
are clearly defamatory according to their ordinary meaning.  
They are calculated to be personally and professionally 
insulting and demeaning.  They refer to the plaintiff as a 
dishonest man, liar, scumbag, pimp and disgusting maggot, 
to name a few.  They falsely allege that the plaintiff is 
part of organized crime and financed by �mobs�.  [Grosvenor] 
falsely allege[s] that the plaintiff was convicted of child molestation.  

[Grosvenor] attacked the plaintiff�s credibility and reputation as 
a lawyer.  They significantly discredit his personal and 
professional reputation and they do so over and over again.  
They heap hatred, contempt and ridicule on the plaintiff 
and by their volume and wide dissemination, they seriously 
expose the plaintiff to hatred, contempt and ridicule from 
others.  As the plaintiff testified at trial, to be falsely 
alleged to be a pedophile convicted of sexual assault 
against a young person is particularly hurtful.

[55]      With respect to the second element, I have no 
difficulty concluding that [Grosvenor's] defamatory words 
are published.  

The Internet is a means of publication like no other, given its ability 
to instantaneously send words throughout the 
world to the millions who have access to computers.  The 
defendant has caused defamatory words to be communicated 
to others by the Postings and each time he has re-posted 
the same defamatory words in the Postings, he has created a new 
publishing of these words.

[56]      I also have no difficulty concluding that the 
third element has been established, in that the plaintiff 
was clearly the person being defamed.  The defendant 
mentioned the plaintiff�s name in all of the Fourteen 
Postings referred to above.  In some of the Postings, the defendant 
included links to a picture of the plaintiff.

[57]      It is for these reasons I conclude that the 
defendant Grosvenor's Postings have defamed the plaintiff.


RANCHERS: Lock up your cows - Grosvenor's loose.