Information on John La Tourrette
Laife
he's a fraud in the martial arts and evidently he finds it offensive. Ever
hear of free speech rights, Doc?
I post information so that people do not get fooled my him and his scam. He
claims to have modeled Bruce Lee, trained Mike Echanis, and disseminated his
technology to Dan Inosanto and Paul Vunak. Anyways his claims are just
totally outrageous. I ask him for proof of his claims and he clams up.
Next thing I know he's threatening a lawsuit.
If you know anything about the John La Tourrette or his alias the speedman,
please email me at
la...@eyesoffire.cc
It's about time we brought this guy to justice. And Stop letting scammers
make money off innocent people and then try to silence people who question
him.
Laife
Grappler240
would be exposed in open court, on public record.
I don't think you have anything to worry about. It aint libel/slander unless
you know it or have good evidence, anyway, that it is/may be untrue(what you
are saying, I mean).
Ask Trav to be sure, though.
G240
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------
"You can carve it on a bowling pin and cram it,for all I care."
-Gichoke
Chas
>
> John La Tourrette is threatening to sue me with his attorney's. I think
> he's a fraud in the martial arts and evidently he finds it offensive. Ever
> hear of free speech rights, Doc?
Your 'free speech right' doesn't include criminal defamation- just to
get that out of the way.
> I post information so that people do not get fooled my him and his scam.
Well good.
That will, no doubt, be a source of solace and comfort to you while
you're living in your car.
> He
> claims to have modeled Bruce Lee, trained Mike Echanis, and disseminated his
> technology to Dan Inosanto and Paul Vunak. Anyways his claims are just
> totally outrageous. I ask him for proof of his claims and he clams up.
> Next thing I know he's threatening a lawsuit.
The burden of proof is on you when you call a man a 'fraud' running a
'scam'. That's an accusation of criminality, as well as about a
supposed incapacity in his profession. He doesn't even have to prove
damages in order to get a very punitive judgment against you.
He has no responsibility to answer you about anything. The entire
burden of proof is on you.
*Very* expensive defense costs for you- lots of investigative time,
lots of complicated proof- and, if you don't prove your position in
it's entirety, you're fucked.
> If you know anything about the John La Tourrette or his alias the speedman,
> please email me at
> la...@eyesoffire.cc
Why would anyone help you to justify a position you've already taken
publicly?
> It's about time we brought this guy to justice.
> And Stop letting scammers
> make money off innocent people and then try to silence people who question
> him.
Sounds like the only trouble LaTourette is going to have is collecting
a judgment against you.
--
Chas Clements
casemaker 303-364-0403
ch...@kuntaosilat.net
http://www.kuntaosilat.com/
http://chasclements.tripod.com/index.htm
Chas
> I don't think you have anything to worry about. It aint libel/slander unless
> you know it or have good evidence, anyway, that it is/may be untrue(what you
> are saying, I mean).
The entire burden of proof is on the speaker. LaTourette is under no
onus whatsoever to defend his position. It is not incumbent upon him
to prove *anything*, only on the speaker.
And the speaker has made some very specific kinds of accusations;
'fraud', 'scam'- an appeal to 'bring him to justice'. Those are
criminal accusations relating to LaT's profession. He better have some
very good proofs, or hope that LaT finds it inconvenient to sue him,
or he is going to be looking at a huge judgment against him that could
take everything he'll ever own for the rest of his life.
'Free speech' is not a license to defame someone with impunity- and
defamation laws are very strong. Particularly if he has defamed the
man on the Internet, everything is archived forever, and the
defamation stays 'current'- there is no statute of limitations,
because there isn't a point at which the publication ceases- nor can
it be 'retracted'.
He's in big trouble, and his only hope is that LaTourette doesn't want
to spend the $3/5K to start the suit. Of course, if LaT does start the
suit, it will cost him a $10K retainer just to reply to it- unless he
can do it on his own. He could countersuit, but then he would have
*two* burdens of proof to assume, and could lose on *both*.
I don't know LaT except from his writings. He's been around for thirty
years, and 'proving' that he did/didn't do 'something' is going to get
*very* complicated- particularly as some of the principal actors are
dead.
Yeah- he's in big trouble.
Laife
Laife
"Chas" <gryp...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:3D809358...@attbi.com...
Laife
judgment in libel/slander in Texas.
It is state specific you know. What state do you live in?
Laife
"Chas" <gryp...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:3D809DFA...@attbi.com...
Robert Low
>Chas, what do you base this information on?
You find it surprising that the onus of proof is on the
person making accusations of fraud?
--
Rob. http://www.mis.coventry.ac.uk/~mtx014/
Laife
him. I will have to contact my attorney for a specialist.
Laife
"Grappler240" <grapp...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20020912063433...@mb-mo.aol.com...
Laife
I'm curious Chas, is this professional legal opinion or just some thoughts
you have?
Laife
"Chas" <gryp...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:3D809358...@attbi.com...
Chas
>
> My information says that it is almost impossible for him to collect a
> judgment in libel/slander in Texas.
>
> It is state specific you know. What state do you live in?
He won't sue you in Texas- you are going to a Federal Court, using the
applicable state law of *his* state, not yours. You are liable
anywhere in the US. He can serve you in Texas for you to answer in
Maine- under Maine law or Federal law, whichever *he* chooses. Any
judgment will be in force in any State.
And all it costs him is about $150 and a trip to the law library to
download a forma. At that point, every onus is on you to defend your
act of defamation. He doesn't even have to get a lawyer to get a
default judgment if you don't answer his complaint.
If you answer his complaint with a defense of 'truth', it is incumbent
upon you to prove that truth. He doesn't even have to defend against
it if you don't *prove* that your allegations in a court of law. If he
makes an active defense and proves your insufficiency of substance,
the particular sort of defamation that you did in your initial post is
sufficient to warrant damages, punitive damages and exemplary damages.
Two of the five sorts of 'criminal' defamation are accusing someone of
a crime and impugning a man's profession.
Chas
>
> Chas, what do you base this information on?
idle chitchat.
Laife
In his video "speed hitting secrets", he does just about everything wrong.
His balance is off during the demonstration. No body mechanics. No breath
control.
As Paul Vunak said you can look at a man's body mechanics and tell if he's
effective.
There's a whole lot more.
Laife
"Chas" <gryp...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:3D80B2AC...@attbi.com...
Kirk Lawson
>
> I thinking about counter-sueing him. I have my own list of charges against
> him. I will have to contact my attorney for a specialist.
He guys, remember how I was talking about "frivolous law suits"???
Well, if both these guys are suing, it's a cinch that *one* of them
shouldn't be, right?
Peace favor your sword (IH)
--
"In these modern times, many men are wounded for not having weapons or
knowledge of their use."
-Achille Marozzo, 1536
--
"...it's the nature of the media and the participants. A herd of martial
artists gets together and a fight breaks out; quelle surprise."
-Chas Speaking of rec.martial-arts
Laife
Laife
"Kirk Lawson" <NO_lklaw...@heapy.com.SPAMSUX> wrote in message
news:3D80B988...@heapy.com.SPAMSUX...
Chas
> Anyways I was asking for information on La Tourrette and not legal advice.
You don't direct the thrust of the discussion
> I'm curious Chas, is this professional legal opinion or just some thoughts
> you have?
Neither.
Chas
> Actually it's quite easy to prove my claim.
> In his video "speed hitting secrets", he does just about everything wrong.
> His balance is off during the demonstration. No body mechanics. No breath
> control.
Has nothing to do with 'fraud', 'scam' or 'bringing him to justice'.
You didn't state an opinion, you made an allegation of fact.
> As Paul Vunak said you can look at a man's body mechanics and tell if he's
> effective.
Then get him to pony in for your expenses- it's the least he could do.
> There's a whole lot more.
There better be.
Chas
>
> I thinking about counter-sueing him. I have my own list of charges against
> him.
What possible cause of action could you have against him?
> I will have to contact my attorney for a specialist.
No shit.
Laife
>
> > I'm curious Chas, is this professional legal opinion or just some
thoughts
> > you have?
>
> Neither.
So what do you base your statements on? Fantasies or what? If you can cite
more than one-sided sources, you would have some credibility here.
Laife
DougŽ
with their crayola:
>Sounds like the only trouble LaTourette is going to have is collecting
>a judgment against you.
Not that I care because as far as I am concerned American
Kenpo is fast becoming the newest version of TKD but does Texas have
homstead laws that prevent people from taking your house and car etc
like in florida during legal issues etc? Am I making sense or am i
misunderstanding the law?
DougŽ
ICQ# - 49024165
AOL IM - sokolistalina
http://members.tripod.com/~russianmartialart/systema.html
Chas
> .......does Texas have
> homstead laws that prevent people from taking your house and car etc
> like in florida during legal issues etc?
'Homestead exemption' differs from state to state. In some states, you
have to specifically file a Homestead Declaration prior to any
litigation- in others, it's automatically exempted, but you have to
ask for it. In others, there is a set amount of personal/household
items that are exempt from judgment. There are some states wherein a
judgment is bankruptable, others in which it's not.
As a means for making people watch their mouths in the future, it
ain't bad.
If he has no real property, only his tools/clothes and such- but any
money in other sorts of holdings, he's fucked. He's fucked for his
salary, any windfall money, any inheritance- even damages he might get
in an action of his own in the future.
He's fucked if he can't *prove* a 'fraud', scam, or whatever. He
didn't voice an opinion, he notified us all of a crime to which we
might fall victim if his word believed.
Chas
> .......
> > > I'm curious Chas, is this professional legal opinion or just some
> thoughts
> > > you have?
> > Neither.
> So what do you base your statements on?
Proceeding with a claim of defamation in Federal Court, representing
myself.
> Fantasies or what?
or what.
>If you can cite
> more than one-sided sources, you would have some credibility here.
I'm not the one with the problem, Scooter; you are.
Laife
what you are.
You act like you know shit when you don't. Always going trying to prove how
tough and bad you are to make up for some lack. That's what you've been
doing for years. This libel/slander case is one point.
Laife
Laife
> Laife wrote:
> > .......
> > > > I'm curious Chas, is this professional legal opinion or just some
> > thoughts
> > > > you have?
> > > Neither.
> > So what do you base your statements on?
>
> Proceeding with a claim of defamation in Federal Court, representing
> myself.
>
> > Fantasies or what?
>
> or what.
>
> >If you can cite
> > more than one-sided sources, you would have some credibility here.
>
> I'm not the one with the problem, Scooter; you are.
>
I don't appreciate the disrespect from you with those comments regarding
Scooter. That's probably what got you into the trouble in the first place.
You are the one who is in big trouble.
I know plaintiffs that spent $25,000 in defamation suits and got zippo
dollars in return. What he did get in return was the other guy to shut up,
that is to stop continuing making those statements. He did not even get a
retraction from the other guy. And the plantiff had one of the top libel
attorney's in the state.
I hope you get your facts straight next time before you present yourself as
high and mighty. Looks like you are going to end up with zippo dollars and
the other guy is just laughing at you. That's exactly what happened in the
case I am referring to.
The fact is that everyone I talked to whose already been through a
libel/slander suit already knows what I am talking about. Let us know the
results when you are finished. My guess is you will give up long before you
collect any real money (more than $2,000 dollars).
Laife
Chas
> I don't appreciate the disrespect from you with those comments regarding
> Scooter.
Pound sand, shit or go blind; it's all the same to me; Scooter.
> That's probably what got you into the trouble in the first place.
> You are the one who is in big trouble.
Not from you, Skippy.
> I hope you get your facts straight next time before you present yourself as
> high and mighty. Looks like you are going to end up with zippo dollars and
> the other guy is just laughing at you. That's exactly what happened in the
> case I am referring to.
Hold that thought- perhaps it'll sustain you under the bridge.
> The fact is that everyone I talked to whose already been through a
> libel/slander suit already knows what I am talking about. Let us know the
> results when you are finished. My guess is you will give up long before you
> collect any real money (more than $2,000 dollars).
Well, there's two things you know nothing about- right in a row too.
Chas
Thanks for sharing, Puss.
Chas
Thanks for sharing, Puss.
LazyMonkey
and you guys always give a warm fuzzy feeling. And BTW. defamation issues
are usually negated if the individual is famous...hence all the crap the
National Enquirer publishes. So....John La Tourrette would probably fit in
that category in the martial arts world. For example if you did decided to
say crap about me...I can probably sue you for defamation because I'm a
nobody. versus John La Tourrette whose sold videos, does advertisements,
yada yada yada. After reading the thread I'm completely lost on who is
sueing who however, if possible I'd drop the issue. law suits are expensive
for everybody. Oh, in case of questions on my credibility. I took several
prelaw classes in college and I've watched several Ally McBeal episodes so I
would get laid by girlfriend!
Michael
PS I've met John La Tourrette about 12 years ago and he can hit about 12-15
times in a second, but I dont remember the last time I was taken out by a
fly swatter?
--
Renegade Shaolin: The martial arts web site for the evolving martial artist.
Check out our huge selection of quality martial arts equipment at affordable
prices.
http://www.renegadeshaolin.com/
"Chas" <gryp...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:3D814EDC...@attbi.com...
Chas
> .......And BTW. defamation issues
> are usually negated if the individual is famous...hence all the crap the
> National Enquirer publishes. So....John La Tourrette would probably fit in
> that category in the martial arts world.
Nope- a 'public person' is a high standard to meet, and LaT probably
doesn't meet the criteria. And, in any case, the statements were made
about his integrity and professional capacity, not some private
matter. Even then, 'false light of privacy' might suffice to spank a
detractor.
> For example if you did decided to
> say crap about me...I can probably sue you for defamation because I'm a
> nobody. versus John La Tourrette whose sold videos, does advertisements,
> yada yada yada.
Nope- in fact, the damages might well be exponentially higher as he
has been accused of 'incompetence', 'fraud' and so on. The four/five
criteria for criminal defamation are inclusive of both of those
accusations. A successful plaintiff doesn't even have to prove
damages, they are 'deemed'. You can't accuse someone of a crime, a
woman of sexual profligacy, a person of professional incompetence, a
person of having a 'loathsome disease' and maybe something else I
don't presently remember.
I don't mean to burn bread on the guy, but if LaT cares to press it,
he could be living in a dumpster before he gets too much older.
> After reading the thread I'm completely lost on who is
> sueing who however, if possible I'd drop the issue. law suits are expensive
> for everybody.
It's just another arena, just another fight, just another set of
techniques to learn. Becoming conversant in the law allows you to
respond to aggressive people who would otherwise be taboo; women, old
folks, corporate systems, cripples, people at a great distance,
bullies that you can't whip physically- all kinds of good stuff.
While I wouldn't countenance 'frivolous' lawsuits, neither do I think
that my First Amendment Right to petition for redress of grievance is
superfluous or archaic.
And, speaking of frivolous lawsuits, people should know that one of
the first steps in any civil case is an offer of proof that the case
has substance and raises a question that the court can answer.
'Frivolous' lawsuits are weeded out pretty quickly- the obvious
exceptions are just that, not the 'rule'.
Jeffery J. Leader
>If you know anything about the John La Tourrette or his alias the speedman
See here:
http://www.martialtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=755
I have several of his books from the 70s--some good stuff, buried
amongst much fluff.