Showing posts with label NAFPS Selections: Bullies and desperate ones who just want to shut up critics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NAFPS Selections: Bullies and desperate ones who just want to shut up critics. Show all posts

Monday, October 25, 2021

NAFPS Selections: Bullies, and desperate ones who just want to shut up critics

[From the New Age Frauds and Plastic Shamans forum, by "educatedindian," May 13, 2014]:


POV has sent letters to three critics in an attempt to silence and intimidate them and force a public apology. The critics shared the letters with NAFPS mods. They agreed to our commenting upon the letters. I decline to post any of the critics' names, though two of them said it was OK to do so for them.

The letter claims to be from a reputable law firm, but it's nothing like any I've ever seen. Two lawyers consulted by the critics agree, in their words, "It's pure BS" and legally useless. I seriously wonder if a junior employee at the firm sent the document on the company letterhead without the firm's knowledge or approval.

In fact, the form is "signed" by the typed in name of the firm "Donald Sutherland and Associates", followed by simply two big initials, said to be Donald Sutherland's. I highly doubt the firm would send a letter not listing the lawyer allegedly handling the case. The letter also lacks legal language and instead accuses the three critics of defamation simply for having an opinion about POV.

The letter claims the firm has taken over 300 screen shots of posts by the three critics at half a dozen websites including NAFPS. It goes on to try and give a little history lesson in libel law, almost like a junior law clerk wrote it.

Finally the letter was not sent by courier. It's the kind of thing perhaps one person at the firm agreed to do as a courtesy, hoping to bluff someone.

There are also three letters of apology the firm allegedly demands the critics sign within ten days. Those ten days passed four days ago, with no further action. Pretty safe to say those letters and threatened deadline failed.

The three things that POV or the firm claims were libelous are:
That POV harmed Native communities.
That POV people may have used hypnotism.
That people taking part in POV have been harmed.

I don't claim to be an expert in Canadian law, but under US law none of those arguments are even remotely libelous. Clearly people have been harmed by POV, esp NDNs. Funds that could have been used to actually help and heal people have been diverted to POV. Some of the POV people were clearly trained in hypnotism, so to point to the possibility of that being used is not libelous.

That POV would resort to this shows makes them look to be bullies, and desperate ones who just want to shut up critics.