Divorced Man's Blog-Free Speech?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

MrsSpringsteen

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
29,244
Location
Edge's beanie closet
DOYLESTOWN, Pa., Aug. 1 (UPI) -- A bitter, divorced Pennsylvania man's blog has triggered a free-speech debate, officials say.

Doylestown resident Anthony Morelli created his blog, ThePsychoExWife.com, in 2007 as a way to blow off steam about his ex-wife, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported Sunday.

But then his ex-wife, Allison Morelli, found out about the Web site and became very upset, calling it "heartbreaking" and potentially harmful to their 9- and 12-year-old sons.

At a June 6 custody hearing, Bucks County Court Judge Diane Gibbons ordered Anthony Morelli to take down the Web site and banned him from mentioning his ex-wife "on any public media" or saying anything about his children online "other than 'happy birthday' or other significant school events.

Over the following two days, Morelli posted two more entries, one saying he would comply with the judge's ruling and then another calling Allison Morelli "a f- psycho" and a "black-out drunk," and asked "what kind of f- judge gives the kids back to her?" He also wrote he would keep the blog going, saying, "The judge has no say over what I write here."

On June 14, Gibbons called the Morellis back to court, saying "It is not just venting that I have read in these pages. It amounts to outright cruelty," and had the Web site shut down.

In early July, Anthony Morelli hired a new lawyer to appeal the case to Superior Court, claiming Gibbons violated his right to free speech.

Some experts agree Gibbons' ruling abridged Morelli's free speech.

"I think the judge did overstep her bounds a little bit in ordering the Web site taken down," said Robert D. Richards, founding director of the Pennsylvania Center for the First Amendment at Pennsylvania State University.

Allison Morelli said she just wants the legal battle to end.

"What the judge said in court made perfect sense to me," she said. "Stop doing what you're doing, and do the right thing for your children.

Save ThePsychoExWife.com

In a Family Courtroom in Bucks County, PA, Judge Diane E. Gibbons recently ordered a father to take down a website, a blog actually, called: ThePsychoExWife.com. A portion of this site is dedicated to telling a story, based on true events, regarding a very contentious divorce and custody battle with this ex-wife. The purpose of the website was to attract others going through similarly difficult divorce and custody situations in order to help them manage theirs better. The Father, in this case, was ordered to shut it down under threat of incarceration and/or risk losing custody of his children.

Judge Diane E. Gibbons has violated the father’s civil rights by ordering him to remove the blog. Fact is, he neither owns the website nor the content. The existence of the website, in and of itself, has no affect on his children. It would forever remain so, provided both parents monitor the children’s computer usage as any good parent should.

The father has appealed this order on the grounds that his civil rights are being violated in several different ways, not the least of which is the violation of the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution regarding freedom of speech as well as his 14th Amendment rights as he was not allowed to present evidence or object during the two hearings she held, in fact the Judge would not even let him speak or respond to false accusations made by his ex and the judge herself at all.

We are asking for help in this defense because it is an issue that faces any parent that is divorced. Imagine a judge telling you that you cannot talk about your children on “any public media” – which would include things like Facebook updates, Twitter, or your personal blog – or you will lose custody. Imagine the far-reaching consequences for bloggers everywhere if orders such as this one are left unchallenged? There goes your online support group. There goes your Facebook and Twitter updates. Your website, personal OR commercial – ordered gone under threat of incarceration and having your beloved children removed from your custody. This order flies in the face of our civil rights, and your civil rights, too! Imagine trying to protect your children from abuse and a judge telling you that you must hide the abuse and protect the abuser by not allowing you to talk about the abuse in public, we can’t let this stand.

For those of you that work in the Internet Marketing Industry – imagine a family court threatening to remove your children from your life because you run a website they object to, though your children never even see it. If you are an author, imagine a family court threatening to remove your children from your life because you write a book they object to. Imagine sending a vulgar email to your brother who passes it on to your ex-wife and a judge decides you shouldn’t have custody because she didn’t like the joke. This could happen to you. This is happening across the country right now, and we must stand up to this violation of the First Amendment. We must protect our freedom of speech and not allow family judges to use our rights against us when deciding custody.

A positive outcome to this case unquestionably has the potential to have a significant impact on a wide range of businesses, families, people. We humbly request your support.
 
Let's bypass this whole Free Speech issue for a moment. Shouldn't this guy take the high road and stopping talking shit about his kids' mother on the internet? On a fuckin' blog no less? This guy is a fuckin' loser. Who gives a shit if his kids won't read it? Its still out there for the rest of the world to see. :doh:
 
Shouldn't this guy take the high road and stopping talking shit about his kids' mother on the internet?


Good point, and thanks for the reply.

No matter how angry you get, I think when kids are involved that has to be the main guide for your behavior. Your kids aren't going to care one bit about your free speech or civil rights when they find any of this out.
 
Most, if not all, divorce judges encourage both sides to refrain from making disparaging remarks about each other to or in front of the children. This guy is taking it to a whole new level. Ideally, he should zip his mouth, close down his site and move on with his life. That would be the healthy and proper thing to do for all parties involved. He isn't helping divorced men going through the same thing. He's just condoning foolishness.
 
Has anyone seen the blog itself? I find it hard to judge without that.
 
Has anyone seen the blog itself? I find it hard to judge without that.

I don't think the site should exist at all. Even if the guy is telling the truth, he should be the bigger person and not discuss any of this on the internet. His children at some point in time could still stumble upon it.


Plus, judges look at Facebook too, deepy, as well as Twitter.
 
What I am saying,
is if the guy wants to get the information out
a blog is one of the least effective ways to do it.
 
Well, I didn't read much, but from what I can tell he doesn't use his wife or his children's names. I"m not sure if I even saw his name on the blog. No pictures were posted.

Both he and the ex-wife sound like pretty miserable people, but I really can't see how he should have been shut down. . . :shrug:
 
Personally, I'd prefer he vent his anger on the web by means of a keyboard than by possibly more violent means.

A website can be taken down and children can be barred from reading it.....but physical damage is harder to repair afterwards.
 
it's like those "personal-life" bloggers who dish the dirt on their private life, their friends' private lives, and their mother-in-laws, then they get a book deal and suddenly get shot to fame, lose all their friends, and become social outcasts :D

can they not just make up a story or at least change the names if they want to write a book? i think such individuals are just self-obsessed, not a free speech issue really...

is defamation not an issue here btw??
 
If the woman can be identified and prove she's being exposed to ridicule, then I think so... but if she can't be identified from his posts then no. At least that's my understanding of defamation
 
but if the blogger's identity is known, as it is now, then surely his ex-wife's identity is a given, no?
 
Back
Top Bottom