the thing that is an even better thought experiment, is whether I could video tape myself fucking a prostitute, then sell the tape, and avoid the prostitution charges...

where's the AK47 letter?

7:12 - I think that wouldn't work.

If you paid the prostitute for her services, you couldn't videotape it as a pretext for a First Amendment defense.

Explained here:

http://tinyurl.com/3dghff

(That's a tinyurl of the link above)

What is this blather, you cover the randazza blog, but not the xoxohth litigation???

I'm not checking XOXO from work; what's new in the litigation?

You can read the AK47 letter in its entirety here.

http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=785954&mc=19&forum_id=2

Scroll down to the 11th post. The guy is losing it.

Someone not stuck on their firm's network please post the letter here in the comments.

Slate had a piece about this question

http://www.slate.com/id/2186552/

The letter is six pages long

http://randazza.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/letter-to-kvn-from-ak47.pdf

KvN incorporated some of the highlights into their response to his Motion to Quash:

http://randazza.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/ak47motionopp.pdf

Sadly, 11:10, all the links on Satyricon are down.

11:26

They still work for me.

Doe Litigation & Autoadmit.com
I recently received a subpoena from AT&T services, apparently in connection with the
lawsuit brought by (DOE II and (DOE III against certain posters on the
Autoadmit website. The subpoena threatens to disclose all information pertaining to my
identity unless a motion or other measure is fied before Februar 25, 2008. At
considerable expense to myself and family, a motion to quash has been prepared. For the
reasons mentioned below, I am begging you to release, me from this unortunate case.
First, I'd like to express my deepest regret for being associated with Autoadmit.com, a
site which has apparently recently caused (DOE III and (DOE II much stress.
Autoadmit is a fantastic waste oftime, and indeed ought to be shut down, lest this sort of
thng happen again.

That said, I canot and wil not be dragged into this huge mess simply because I made an
inane, non-theatening and certainly non-actionable comment on the site. The comment is
"Women named Jil and /DOElll should be raped." No one, least of all
lawyers and persons like(DOE II and (DOE II. who are versed in the basic fudamentals of
tort law, would ever
consider this an injurous or actionable comment. It's a suggestion, not a threat; it's a
stupid opinion, not a harful assertion of fact or "description of sexual violence,"
whatever that means. Worse yet, it's the only thing I've ever said on the site that includes
rDOE iii's name. I simply find it amazing that ths nonsensical comment could ever be
lumped together and equated with the "T14 contest" site or the barage of
horrble emails
sent to YLS faculty and students by certain other posters. I did not take par in any of that
nonsense. I never insulted (DOE iiior (DOE II. I never attacked (DOE iiior (DOE I) ,. I never
theatened (DOE I1Jor (DOE I) . Indeed, under my other monikers, I actually defended (DOE II)
and (DOE II and severely berated and attacked the YLS email idiots as well as the "T14"
site morons for their conduct. All this prompts me to ask: Why am I a defendant in this
suit?
Unfortunately, I will not be able to keep my curent job if it is revealed that I once posted
on, or am in any way affliated or associated with, Autoadmit.com. As I've revealed on
the Autoadmit.com site, I'm not a lawyer. Obviously I canot give you the precise detals
of my job duties, but I do support many, many people in numerous ways. Therefore, ifI
lose my job, many people, including my famly, wil suffer personally for it.
I've been advised to protect myself from (DOE III) (DOE Ii, and their cadre of elite lawyers
by using the Internet. Thus, I am curently in the process of creating a website that I will
use to track the litigation, step by step, until its resolution. The website wil detail all the
allegations and allegedly harful comments in the case, and will featue the actual names
of (DOE III and lDOE II . as well as information pertaining to why they are
the allegations, accusations, or allegedly harful
suing me, and so on. Since none of
comments have been tested yet in cour or otherwise proven false, I will ask for
comments on whether such allegedly harful comments are tre or have any merit. The
website wil be publicly viewable, obviously, and in order to reach a maximally large
audience, I will send a link to Yale students as well as other unversity students. A link to

the site will also be posted on Autoadmit.com, the site that started this whole mess. A
mirror site will be created, too, as is customar when a site achieves too much traffic.
(Autoadmit's mirror site is Xoxohth.com.) A blog will also be established for the site. As
any person familiar with the operation and creation of
web sites will attest, blogs are very
easy to create and maintain, and there are hundreds of free blog providers and free
website providers for persons interested in airing their views to the public. Two obvious
provides are Google, which provides GooglePages (which, incidentally, is where certain
posters attacked (DOE III and ¡DOE lion the "T14 contest" site, which led (DOE III and ¡DOE II
to fie this suit - note that the website I intend to create wil not intentionally disparage
(DOE III or (DOE II ,in any way, but wil rather ask the public for comment into whether any
of the comments posted by the anonymous defendants are true or have any merit, as well
as accept general comments and opinions of the girls from classmates, frends, and other
observers in an effort to build any possible defense to (DOE 111' s and ¡DOE ii 's claims), and
blogger.com, which provides a free blog-creation service. Again, I was not involved in
any way with the websites or emails created or sent by the anonymous defendants.
Efforts to Intimidate or Silence Me
Creating and managing the site is well withi my First Amendment rights. Any action to
silence, harass or coerce me into taing the site down will be met by an appropriate anti-
SLAPP motion which, as I'm sure you know, protects speakers from "strategic" suits
designed to silence criticism and/or public speech. The protections provided by the anti-
SLAPP laws are especially strong where the speech pertins to a matter curently under
review in a judicial proceeding, and thus applies to speech pertaining to suit brought by
(DOE III and (DOE II . Such a motion also entitles me to attorney's fees
incured in the process. An anti-SLAPP suit may also be pursued to recover attorney's
fees already incurred as a result of
ths suit. As you know, Connecticut doesn't curently
have Anti-SLAPP legislation, but Californa - i.e., where the Subpoena was executed-
does, as do many other states. To date, this horrible case has cost me several thousand
dollars in legal fees and related costs.
My intent is not to further harm ¡DOE H) and (DOE II . As I stated above, I recognize that
these women have experienced some emotional diffculty as a result of their lives being
publicly scrutinized and criticized on Autoadmit.com and other websites. However, ifI
am going to be sued by these young women for making a frivolous, non-threatening, non-
actionable, innocuous and constitutionally protected comment on a website -- i.e.,
"Women named Jil and ¡DOE lIishould be raped," then I think it fair to create a site that
details all the claims put fort against me and my co-defendants. I have no way of
knowing whether the anonymous defendants' comments concernngrDoElilS and (DOEll'S
criminality and sexual deviancy are accurate, and a site that details all the allegations and
accepts comments from persons that know (DOE III or (DOE II would be a good place to
examine those comments.
There is also another reason for the site. Since ¡DOE iil s and ¡DOE ii's suit puts forth all
sorts of extraordinar claims, and since I have no idea whether (DOE II) and ¡DOE II . are as
sexually loose or bigoted as the anonymous Defendants' claimed on the site, I will need

evidence to support a "truth" defense to ¡DOE HI'S and (DOE II l s allegations. And since,
apparently, it is extraordinarly easy to obtain a subpoena, I will be pursuing the
following subpoenas (note that one or more of
the following items can easily be obtained
through an alternative discovery tool):
1) A subpoena for information pertaining to the size of (DOE IIi'S breasts
and whether such breasts, as alleged by one Defendant, are "fake"
2) Information pertaining to whether ¡DOE II) or (DOE II are indeed
"unversally hated" by their peers
3) Information pertaining to whether lDOE III or (DOEll have any
sexually transmitted diseases, including Herpes
4) Information pertaining to the law firms that interviewed ¡DOE III and
(DOE Ii , and why such firms decided not to hire (DOE III or (DOE II
5) Information pertaining to whether (DOE ii did indeed achieve a score of
159 on the LSAT
6) Information pertainng to ¡DOE III ' s religion - i.e., Islam - and
information from any Muslim peers that may be able to shed any light on this
case (this information may be a bit difficult to get, but local mosques would
be a good place to send information requests or, if necessar, subpoenas)
The above information requests and subpoenas wil be sent to YLS students, faculty,
frends and family ofiDOE HI and ¡DOE 11 to the extent they are able to be located, as well as
anyone else who knows lDOE III and (DOE II . and would be able to provide such information.
Whenever I make an information request, I will state exactly what the request is for,
whom it concerns, and why I am seeking it. I wil use ¡DOE iiI's and (DOE II d S true names,
for without their true names, the inormation requests will be completely useless. As I
stated above, my purose here is not to hur (DOE II) or (DOE II ; my purose is to defend
myself. However, I think it safe to say some of
the information would be harful to
DOE ill and lDOE II . This brings to mind the unfortnate situation that Robert Steinbuch
found himself in - i.e., having to deal with numerous embarassing revelations - when he
brought a defamation lawsuit against one Jessica Cutler not too long ago.
The critical question, I think, fOflDOE III and (DOE I) ,to consider is whether having to deal
with such a site and blog is wort "uncovering" the identity of a person who merely said
H)
hat he thinks "Women named Jil and (DOE
should be raped." It is especially unortunate
hat these words were the only negative words I ever wrote concernng either ¡DOE III or
(DOE II . Again, I am not a lawyer, and due to my lack of legal expertise, these subpoenas
and other discovery tools are the only things I believe I can do to defend myself against this lawsuit.
Alternatives
nOE HI. and (DOE i) , I beg you to release me from this lawsuit. If this matter to the extent that it involves myself or moniker, "AK47," is not resolved very soon, then I will have absolutely no choice but to move forward with the site, blogs and my defense. Please

amend the complaint to properly reflect that "AK47" is no longer a part of
this litigation,
or rescind or retract the AT&T subpoena, or take other measures, as appropriate, in order
to release myself and my moniker from ths lawsuit. I am willng to provide any help I
can to aid you in finding and holding responsible any Defendant that actually harmed you.

Malicious Prosecution
There is also the issue of malicious prosecution. The lawsuit was filed by your lawyers in
Connecticut. After they obtaed my IP address from Anthony Ciolli, an IP address that
registered to the bay area of Californa, they executed the Subpoena in the Central
Distrct of Californa, which encompasses Los Angeles and nearby areas. Upon receiving
ths Subpoena, I had absolutely no idea how to defend against it, and thus had to seek
legal help, as well as lose a lot of sleep, time, and money, to figue out a way to stop the
revelation of my identity from occurng. I did in fact experience a lot of emotional
distress over the prospect oflosing my job, ajob that, as I said above, I use to support
many, many people. I've also experienced severe emotional distress due to numerous
other consequences of this case. I've been advised that I may have a claim for the
emotional distress inflcted by this litigation.
The comment at issue here is "Women named Jil and ¡DOE III should be raped." There is
clearly no probable cause to proceed with this suit against "AK47" or myself. Indeed, I
suspect that, thus far, (DOE ill'S and (DOE I) , s desire to pursue this litigation against
myself has been energized by the efforts of their lawyers. It appears, however, that ¡DOE iii s and
(DOEll'S overall objectives may be different than the aims of her lawyers. IfI or any
other defendant chooses to defend ourselves to the full extent allowable under the law, I
am fearful that more har wil visit (DOE ill and (DOE I) . That, of course, would be a rather
perverse consequence of this litigation.
The lawyers in this case, and ¡nOE III and (DOE II , have a duty of good faith independent
factual investigation and legal research sufficient to support a finding of probable cause
to sue. In Wiliams v. Coombs (1986) 179 CaL. App. 3d 626, the Californa Cour of
Appeal held that attorneys who paricipate in the fiing or maintenance of litigation
without probable cause are personally liable for malicious prosecution of a civil action.
Since "Women named Jil and (DOE III should be raped" clearly does not constitute
actionable speech, an action lies against the team of aggressive Keker lawyers that have
orchestrated this lawsuit, as well as agaist (DOE ill and ¡DOE II ) personally.
In Sheldon Appel Co. v. Albert & Oliker (1989) 47 CaL. 3d 863, the Californa Supreme
Cour narowed Wiliams, holding that a tral cour may not delegate the ultimate
determination of probable cause to the jury; it held that the question was one of law
which must be resolved by the Court. Id. at 876. The Sheldon decision specifically
disapproved of dicta from Tool Research & Engineering Corp. v. Henigson (1975) 46
CaL. App. 3d 675, at 683, that the attorney must have a "subjective belief' in the
tenability of his or her client's claim in order to avoid malicious prosecution liability.
Sheldon Appel Co. v. Albert & Oliker, supra, 47 CaL. 3d at 881. Nonetheless, it "strongly

emphasized" that its conclusion "does not by any means suggest that an attorney who
institutes an action which he does not believe is legally tenable is free from the risk of liability" because the lawyer's subjective belief "would clearly be relevant to the question of malice." Id. (emphasis supplied); see also Slater v. Durchfort (1995) 35 CaL. App. 4th
1718,1724.
The Shelton Court also disapproved of
Tool Research dicta suggesting that lack of
probable cause may be proven "simply by showing that (the attorney) failed to perform reasonable legal research or factual investigation before filing a claim." Id. at 882.
Rather, the Shelton Cour held that such lack of diligence is relevant on the issue of
malice. Id. The Shelton Cour specifically disapproved oft he Wiliams decision's
apparent use of lack of investigation to prove lack of probable cause, although it fully endorsed the Wiliams analysis of the tort of malicious prosecution itself. Id. at 882-883
(footnote 9).
There is no possible way elite and extremely-well-educated lawyers such as the Keker lawyers here would think that "Women named Jil and IDOE HI should be raped" is an actionable tort. Even the slightest bit of legal research would reveal that this opinion is not in any way actionable (Doe v. Cahll, holding that mere opinions aren't actionable, is
one obvious example) Malice, therefore, is clear here.
The facts in (DOE IIi'S and (DOE I) " S case against me clearly do not show that any actionable harm was done. They, and their lawyers, therefore, will have to answer for the horrible predicament they've put me in. Yes, I've spent a lot of
money on this case. Yes, I've
experienced emotional distress as a result of realizing that I may lose my job. That is the
result of your unfounded suit against me.
Closing
Than you for your attention in this matter. It is no fu being a litigant in any case,
especially one in which you have to defend yourself against completely unfounded
attacks. Please respond to with an answer to my pleas. If I
am dropped from this suit, I wil not take any of
the actions mentioned above. Like I've
repeated numerous times already, I feel sorry for lDOE III and (DOE I) .. But I simply do not understand why they want to hur me so much for something as frivolous as the aimless,
stupid suggestion I posted on Autoadmit. I honestly hope that we can put this behind us,
and that you eventually hold accountable the defendants that actually harmed you.
Thank you,
John Doe 21, a.k.a. "AK47."

Pathetic. That's a 120 if I ever saw one.

Seriously. If you're going down, at least go down with some panache.

Lat - please don't post pictures like this anymore - there's just no need.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080319/ap_en_ot/girls_gone_wild_spitzer_call_girl;_ylt=AmXWkZtYYCj4R0KfKcHGbuHqChkF

the thing that is an even better thought experiment, is whether I could video tape myself fucking a prostitute, then sell the tape, and avoid the prostitution charges...

Posted by: anonymous | March 18, 2008 07:12 PM

Of course. You are paying her to perform in a video. That is protected by the 1st Amendment. You have to have her consent and release to film it of course. Filming her without her consent is a much more serious crime than patronizing a prostitite, which you would never be charged with unless it was a sting or something and you are caught in the act.

the thing that is an even better thought experiment, is whether I could video tape myself fucking a prostitute, then sell the tape, and avoid the prostitution charges...

Posted by: anonymous | March 18, 2008 07:12 PM

Of course. You are paying her to perform in a video. That is protected by the 1st Amendment. You (or your production company LLC) should also pay yourself as a performer. You have to have her consent and release to film it of course. Filming her without her consent is a much more serious crime than patronizing a prostitite, which you would never be charged with unless it was a sting or something and you are caught in the act.

Come on, Lat. Editing the photo doesn't make it any less troublesome if/when an employer sees this on your hard drive. You know that most of your readers are viewing this from work.