ED Magedson – Founder
(((REDACTED BY EDITOR DUE TO ABUSE OF WEBSITE))),
(((REDACTED BY EDITOR DUE TO ABUSE OF WEBSITE))) ~ Crystal Cox Alleges (((REDACTED))) Violated Bankruptcy Code ~ (((REDACTED)))
MESSAGE FROM THE EDITOR:
Ripoff Report is a forum for people to post true complaints that can help other people by informing them about a problem. It is also a good forum for a business to show the world how it responds to customer complaints. Ripoff Report is not a forum for people to post false complaints, or personal attacks. And, Ripoff Report is not a place for people to commit extortion.
Ripoff Report has dedicated enormous time and resources to protecting free speech. Complaints can make businesses people angry. Complaints that expose scams and frauds make scamming fraudsters very, very angry. Angry people can put pressure on authors to recant, to take it back, to take it down. Ripoff Report protects free speech in several ways, including not ever taking down reports so that there is no use to pressure an author about it and every reason to show the world how to resolve a complaint with courtesy and respect. Ripoff Report also fights lawsuits against taking down reports, and dozens and dozens of times Ripoff Report has defeated lawsuits that attempt to suppress free speech and force the takedown of reports.
Ripoff Report does not take down reports for money. If there is a false report posted, there are many policies that allow the false statements to be rebutted, disproven, exposed as false, and at times even removed from the website. There is a program sponsored by Ripoff Report, designed to be much much easier and less expensive than a lawsuit, called VIP Arbitration. It allows a challenge to a statement to prove that it is false, a defense by the author, and a decision by a neutral arbitrator based on the evidence. False statements can be identified and refuted in this manner. And, the law allows and encourages the Ripoff Report to use good judgment to show the results of the arbitration, and even to redact the contents that someone posted.
Ripoff Report is taking a stand against abuse of the website, and its carefully designed programs to protect free speech. Some people abuse the website by using it for personal attacks, or using it as leverage to harm and extort other people. One of those people is Crystal Cox. Cox has a pattern of behavior that Ripoff Report finds offensive, harmful and disgusting. Here is how the Ninth Circuit Court of appeals described this pattern of behavior in an official written opinion:
ABOUT THE RIPOFF REPORT BELOW
“ . . . Crystal Cox published blog posts on several websites that she created, accusing [her victim] of fraud, corruption, money-laundering, and other illegal activities in connection with the Summit bankruptcy. Cox apparently has a history of making similar allegations and seeking payoffs in exchange for retraction.”
That conduct is wrong. It is disgusting. Ripoff Report is against that kind of thing.
Here is a link to an article on the Ripoff Report that is all about Crystal Cox, and what she does, and how some of it is protected as free speech by the laws of the United States.
Here is a link to the same article posted on another website. http://popehat.com/2014/01/19/protecting-the-free-speech-of-censors-the-crystal-cox-saga/
Protected Free Speech
Well, the law has to protect some speech that is bad speech, in order to protect everyone’s right to free speech. But, Ripoff Report has freedom of speech too. And Ripoff Report chooses to exercise its right to free speech by NOT GIVING CRYSTAL COX A VOICE ON RIPOFF REPORT. That’s right. We did some research and looks like Crystal Cox has used and abused Ripoff Report somewhere around 45 times. And, Ripoff Report does not respect Crystal Cox or what she does, so she she can’t voice her opinions or post her allegations or say anything at all on Ripoff Report website. If we detect her trying to post things, we will not allow it to post. Ripoff Report believes she has abused the opportunity to post on the website and so she loses the opportunity. What about the things she already posted? Well, we are going to redact the heck out of it so that it doesn’t hurt anyone, but the world can see just what kind of garbage it is. And we are posting this statement for everyone to read.
Ripoff Report will repeat some interesting things written by others about Crystal Cox. In the opinion of one very intelligent and wise author named Ken White who was speaking about the law (you can see the full article in the links above) “We protect the Nazis’ right to march at Skokie . . . We protect the right of Fred Phelps’ family to protest funerals even though the America of Phelps dreams is a theocratic hellhole . . . So it shouldn’t be any surprise that we protect the free speech rights of the disturbed and vengeful blogger Crystal Cox, even though she abuses the legal system in an effort to censor and retaliate against people for criticizing her. That’s how we roll.”
Mr. White documents several additional examples of reprehensible conduct by Crystal Cox, and his article is an excellent and interesting read about why it is important to protect free speech, even for people who do bad things.
It is also important to exercise free speech rights AGAINST people who do bad things like Cox does. So, Ripoff Report is standing against Cox and the way she abuses people and the internet.
"The debtor hired Plaintiffs (((REDACTED))) and its principal, (((REDACTED))), in connection with a potential bankruptcy."
So why is there no investigation into the Summit 1031 Bankruptcy and what sure looks to clearly be violations of Bankruptcy Code?
Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox CONTINUES to Allege that it is Not Legal to be "hired by the debtor" in regard to a "potential" bankruptcy, another words an "insider", the way I understand it, and then work AGAINST your clients you were under contract with and be a Trustee
Keep in mind there never needed to be a Trustee, as liquidation was underway. And there are documented emails between parties, including the Department of Justice that flat out say it is NOT in the Creditors best interest to have a Trustee.
Also keep in mind, that the "debtor" that hired (((REDACTED))) went to or is going to PRISON due to the actions of (((REDACTED))) and (((REDACTED))), in my opinion setting up their own client so they could run away with the LOOT that really should have went to Creditors right away. (((REDACTED))) was hired (((REDACTED))) to help them restructure debt as per the signed contract between (((REDACTED))) and (((REDACTED))) that is an Exhibit on the docket of my case (((REDACTED))) v. Cox.
Also keep in mind per the testimony of (((REDACTED))), who actually signed (((REDACTED))) name to the now infamous contract between (((REDACTED))) and (((REDACTED))), she believed that (((REDACTED))) was hired to liquidate (((REDACTED))) and well seems to not understand the contract said (((REDACTED))) was to help restructure debt and not destroy, bankrupt and jail their own clients.
More on that story
A Bit on Bankruptcy Code
"Regarding Bankruptcy Code 1104(a). There was no lawful, ethical reason to appoint a Trustee in the (((REDACTED))) Bankruptcy, it was common knowledge with parties, attorneys, US Trustees, that it was NOT in the Best Interest of the Creditors to Appoint a Trustee, Yet Judge (((REDACTED))) pushed the US Trustee's Office to Do So Anyway. And US Trustee (((REDACTED))) went along with it, I believe, because she had worked for and with (((REDACTED))) of (((REDACTED))) and (((REDACTED))) of (((REDACTED))) on prior "deals".
The Appointment of a Trustee was a Documented FACT that it was NOT in the Best Interest of the Creditors Period.
Here are insider emails from S(((REDACTED))) to (((REDACTED))), and including (((REDACTED))), (((REDACTED))), (((REDACTED))), and (((REDACTED))) of (((REDACTED))). And (((REDACTED))) of (((REDACTED))), (((REDACTED))) of (((REDACTED))), (((REDACTED))) CFO.
Also Keep in mind in regard to Bankruptcy Code 1104(a), I Believe that (((REDACTED))) of (((REDACTED))) was not a disinterested trustee as in section (b)."
Why am I still Yappin' about this? Well because I still have a 10 Million Dollar lawsuit PENDING for one. For two, (((REDACTED))), (((REDACTED))) and (((REDACTED))) lied to reports, lied about an Attorney General Investigation, lied about being extorted and have broke the LAW, yet they have made me, Crystal Cox look to be the Evil One, the Bad Guy, when in TRUTH I was exposing their true and correct actions in the (((REDACTED))) Bankruptcy to the best of my ability based on massive amounts of information I read and did not make up to extort the evil assholes and they knew as they interviewed my main source 3 years before suing me.
Here is the Article the Title came from, pretty much PROVES that there is FOUL Play, So why NOT investigate the (((REDACTED))) Bankruptcy or (((REDACTED))) instead of Targeting the Messenger exposing them, Crystal Cox? Hmmmm
The Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded for new trial the District Court’s granting judgment in favor of the bankruptcy trustee against a blogger on one count for defamation, and affirmed the District Court’s dismissal of all remaining defamation counts based on First Amendment protected speech.
The District Court entered judgment against the defendant blogger on the one remaining count for defamation, and dismissing all other defamation counts.
The judgment awarded the plaintiff trustee and his firm $1.5 million and $1.0 million, respectively, in compensatory damages. Defendant blogger appealed the judgment, and plaintiffs filed a cross-appeal of the District Court’s dismissal of all other causes of action.
The debtor hired Plaintiffs (((REDACTED))) and its principal, (((REDACTED))), in connection with a potential bankruptcy. After the debtor filed its chapter 11 bankruptcy petition, the Bankruptcy Court appointed (((REDACTED))) as the chapter 11 trustee.
Following (((REDACTED))) appointment, Defendant Crystal Cox commenced publishing blog posts on various websites accusing (((REDACTED))) of criminal and wrongful conduct including, inter alia, fraud, corruption, money-laundering, deceit on the government, tax crimes, and fraud against the government. Plaintiffs filed a defamation suit against Cox.
The District Court dismissed all but one of the Plaintiff’s claims holding that Cox’s blog posts were expressions of opinion and, therefore, protected under the First Amendment. On the Plaintiff’s cross-appeal, the Ninth Circuit noted that while opinions are protected speech, a statement that “may . . . imply a false assertion of fact” is actionable.
Applying a three-prong test to determine if a statement contains an “assertion of objective fact,” the Ninth Circuit determined that the District Court did not commit an error in dismissing all but one of the defamation causes of action.
Addressing the remaining count on which the District Court entered judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs, the Ninth Circuit ruled that Plaintiff (((REDACTED))) was not a “public figure,” and because Cox’s blog posts addressed “matters of public concern,” Cox could not be liable for defamation unless she was found to have acted negligently. Further, “presumed damages” could not be awarded unless Cox was found to have acted with actual malice.
Since the District Court failed to instruct the jury accordingly, the Ninth Circuit reversed the judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs and remanded the case to the District Court for a new trial.
Judge(s): (((REDACTED))), (((REDACTED))) AND (((REDACTED))), Circuit Judges."
Source of Above Quote
More on the Crystal Cox Case
Archive of (((REDACTED))) Blog about the (((REDACTED))) Bankruptcy
More on the (((REDACTED))) Bankruptcy
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 03/25/2014 12:21 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/REDACTED-BY-EDITOR-DUE-TO-ABUSE-OF-WEBSITE//REDACTED-BY-EDITOR-DUE-TO-ABUSE-OF-WEBSITE-Crystal-Cox-Alleges-REDACTED-Viol-1133510. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:Search Tips
In order to assure the best results in your search:
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.