Ouch

This will be the last time this happens in the Virginia blogosphere.  Ouch!  Good investigative work J.C.

I hope no one tries to prosecute this kid- as I said in the BVBL controversy- the last thing we need in the Virginia blogsphere is lawsuits or indictments.  Hopefully if anyone sends this to a local prosecutor they will decide to have better things to do with their time then nail a sixteen year old for playing lawyer on the internet.

But still, ouch!

UPDATE:  Cory has some thoughts, for which I also agree.

UPDATE #2-  One good thing came of this fight, which was this picture.  Hillarious.

Comments

[Matt (not the usual one)]

Makes notes folks. Looks like another fine George Allen in the making!

[Webb Defeats Allen]

The VA Political blogsphere is an embarassment.

I'm not talking left or right, I'm saying we all need to take a serious look in the mirror.

The only one who comes out of this thing looking good is Waldo.

Kudos also to JC.

The rest of us have some soul-searching to do.

[phriendlyjaime]

HAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA! WOW. I live near JC and hang out with him regularly; now I know not to cross him.

Excellent work, JC.

[Cory Chandler]

I disagree. Mr. Wilmore went too far. Mr. Wilmore did more than out a pseudonymous blogger; he bullied a teenager.

I'm hardly a defender of Journal of the Common Man. I rebutted its author's attack on Mr. Jaquith, and Mr. Wilmore himself accused me of tearing into him. But suggesting that the kid is a felon is simply intimidation, and Mr. Wilmore should know better.

I agree with Matt: there is another George Allen in the making--if you mean someone who goes too far and picks on a younger guy. But I hope Mr. Wilmore, in future, will keep his usual coolheadedness.

[saywhat??]

The yahoo profile that comes up on Alex and John Mayfield is more than two years old. This kid may be older than 18. I still don't think he should be prosecuted but bullied in the blogosphere? Yep, he's got that coming if he's pretending to be someone he's not.

The blogging right-wingers in the Staunton-Augusta area are very odd, with no credibility. I started reading them once but stopped because I cannot take them seriously.

[Matt (not the usual one)]

Nopes the kid is definitely not a felon.

And it is not even comparable to defrauding actual paying clients by acting like a lawyer! That is quite a stretch. People can definitely assume whatever identity they want to online, and also be prepared to be outed.

However, my George Allen comment was more directed towards that kid - conservative still confederate loving nut job spewing anonymous threats and pretending to be what he is not.

I am sure he has his "I was just acting like a rebel" and "Oh no I am so a lawyer (after replacing cowboy)."

Bright future for him, I'd say :)

[Roanoker]

Let's make one thing clear, telling someone you're a lawyer is not UPL (unlicensed practice of law). It also isn't fraud unless you induce some reliance for your benefit or the relying party's detriment. The kid is a moron who did some stupid, although not illegal things. JC once again shows that he is a prick and a bully.

[The Richmond Democrat]

Yes, by all means: shoot the messenger.

Oh, please. The guy deserved to be called out. You're all going to defend this jerk now, bc he may be a pimple ridden child with no life? What a bunch of babies.

Way to go, JC.

[Roanoker]

"don't shoot the messenger" isn't a defense when the messenger does something wrong. No one will remember this silly kid down the road but everyone will remember what a bully you were. And truthfully, from a lawyer's perspective, the most tortious conduct anyone committed in this process was you accusing someone of a crime that he did not commit. That is called defamation per se and you'd be a pretty easy mark in this case.

[Rowhey]

I'll say this from experience, when Roanoker posts a comment -- particularly on a legal matter -- you can take that comment to the bank.

TRD has gone out on a limb that may no longer support his weight. Let's look at on of his recent comments: "I meant to suggest that he may be a felon. It seems to me that he has shown a pattern of questionable behavior that needs to be investigated."

Oh, really. Okay, TRD, you cited this statute http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+54.1-3904, which states that any person who practices law without a license to be guilty of a class one misdemeanor.

Now, please tell us how you go from citing this statute to suggesting that Mr. Maxwell "may be a felon."

Libel per se may be the actual tort, here.

And, now that we are on this subject, I'd like to ask the lawyers out there if "outing" may actually violate state or federal criminal statutes.

Does "outing" amount to harassment aimed at a specific purpose? Is that purpose to intimidate the pseud to stop blogging?

These are questions that should be addressed.

[James Young]

"Bullying a teenager"?!?!? Hey, I'm among those who's supposed to have liked what he said, but the simple fact is, you stick your head up, and you'd better expect to be shot at. No sympathy there. Moreover, anyone who suggests that this kid committed a felony by representing himself on a blog as an attorney is an idiot.

This is simply another fine example of the evils of anonymous/pseudonymous blogging. I told you so.

[Not Phil]

Ben - when are we going to start talking about Kate & Phil again? You promised a return to that inappropriate topic after Christmas. Do we really have to wait until New Year or later? Don't tell me that you have had a pange of conscience on this issue.

[Dannyboy]

I agree 100% that this kid deserved to be called out. I started blogging at 18 under a pseudonym, but I've never hid my indentity. Ask and I'll tell you who I am. To create a whole other identity? I mean, he had all kinds of stuff there: colleges, occupations, etc.

I do think this kid needs to apologize for lying about who he is. But that's it. No REAL lawyers need to be brought into this thing. I think Ben is right: the last thing we need to do is mix bloggers with lawsuits over things as trivial as this.

[Rowhey]

Dannyboy,
Frankly, I think dueling should be reinstated. (obviously, I'm being tongue-n-cheek, here). But, I think dueling would go a long way towards preventing libel and slander.

Think about it, Gen. Grievous's Dog could send over his second to slap Waldo and TRD across the face with a glove. They then could meet on the dueling grouds at dawn.

This would be the civilized way to proceed.

On the subject of lawsuits, they only work when the defendant isn't judgment proof.

Why sue when there isn't a pot of gold at the end of the ISP?

[Dannyboy]

Rowhey:
"Why sue when there isn't a pot of gold at the end of the ISP?"

Can I use that, or is it copyrighted?

And I have to agree, man, that dueling is the way to go. Just because one Vice-President shot a founding father is no reason to ditch a time-honored tradition. It would also make slapping much more fashionable for men, as we all know that each duel must be proceeded by a slap to the face, either with a glove or hand. (Yes, this too was all tongue-n-cheek.)

[Rowhey]

Dannyboy,
You have my permission to use that quote. Bear in my, I'm a defense lawyer...not a plaintiff attorney so I tend to look at things from standpoint of a potential defendant.

But, I am all for people taking out their disagreements in the boxing ring. I haven't seen the new Rocky Balboa movie yet but I must admit those movies always bring out my competitive nature.

[Rowhey]

I've noticed that JC has taken down this link: http://richmonddemocrat.blogspot.com/2006/12/republican-blogger-commits-fraud.html

I guess he has capitulated.

[The Richmond Democrat]

He he he . . . comments like that just amuse me.

[phriendlyjaime]

"I'll say this from experience, when Roanoker posts a comment -- particularly on a legal matter -- you can take that comment to the bank."

So, I guess you are admitting you are Roanoker, huh Rowhey?

I also appreciate you telling Swac "Girl" that "she" is using intimidation practices; bc "she" is.

[Rowhey]

Jaime,
Don't start any crap with me. I'm not Roanoker. My comment stems from the fact that I concur with his statements.

Additionally, I suspect that I know the true identity of "Roanoker" but I'm not going to tell you who he/she may be.

You are welcome to call me to discuss this if you like. You know where to find me.

In the meantime, I hope you've had a Merry Christmas.

All the best,
Rowhey

[phriendlyjaime]

Oh, c'mon. :) I wasn't starting crap. I thought you knew me better than that and knew when to take a joke.

And a happy happy, merry merry to you as well.

J-me

[phriendlyjaime]

Ben, the constant word verif. is effing annoying.

[Rowhey]

Jaime,
Sorry. I didn't realize you were joking. My bad.

To use your turn of phrase, everything has gone bat shit crazy around here lately. Hence, we all have to walk around loaded for bear anymore.

[t]

t has never been impressed with Waldo.

t is an attorney. A REAL attorney. Is anyone injured?

[AndreaC]

I'm taking credit for the exposure. Who's buying the beer? http://www.raisingkaine.com/showComment.do?commentId=42249

Are the same people who are crying foul at the "bullying" of a teenager the same people who are defending Virgil Goode's verbal assult on Muslims?

Just trying to figure out where these things line up on the GOPpers morality spectrum.

[Rowhey]

Andrea,
I'm chuckling because you seem to really pat yourself on the back over the Martindale Hubbell search.

You should know that publication is hardly comprehensive. Not every licensed attorney is listed there.

[Roanoker]

You folks never cease to amaze me. Saying what JC did wrong is in no way defending the kid. I said in all of my posts that he was a moron. Nonetheless, an inappropriate response by a grown up deserves to be called out. JC doesn't get a free pass just because the person he's defaming happens to be an idiot.

As for my identity, I'm certainly not Rowhey although I am curious how he knows who I am.

[AndreaC]

Rowhey, don't get your panties in a bunch. I am chuckling that this person thought he could get away with a fake identity when it doesn't take a genius to find out someone on line is lying. I just takes time, which few of us have. This guy counted on no one spending the time.

I was patting myself in jest. Only a fool would consider a Martindale search a tough "investigation." (Of course, in this case, it was RIGHT.)

I did try to put a wink on the end of my comment but it didn't show up.

I forgot for a moment that NLS readers don't pass up an opportunity to respond with nasty humorlessness off topic. Thanks for the reminder.

[Rowhey]

Andrea,
I must admit that I was being tongue-n-cheek myself.

Frankly, I think you are over analyzing Maxfield. I don't think his primary intention was to be a provocateur. Nothing more, nothing les.

As to his attempts to delve into intellectual property rights, I think he probably had another lawyer slip a few tidbits to him on the side.

Who knows? I'm still LMAO at the whole donnybrook.

It sure caught a lot of attention -- that you must admit.

Roanoker -- I'm not sure of your true identity but I have my own suspicions through the powers of deductive reasoning. I think I've narrowed it down to 10 or 12 possibilities.

Hardly anything to beat on.

[Rowhey]

I meant to say Maxfield was trying to be a provocateur.