Re: Harassment and Defamation on the Internet

More | Report Post

Response To Charlene Blake:

You posted this same information on many other websites,
including different forums on this site.
The administrator on onother forum called you to account for
your remarks, yet you have not responded. I wonder why?
Just to rmind you of the questions asked by that individual,
the following is a copy. It would be interesting to know
your answers to what I believe are worthy questions--as
follows:

"Ms Blake,

Thank you for your input. Your comments are welcome here as
are all comments that are presented courteously and in an
effort to seek the truth. With that said, there are two
points I’d like to raise.

First, you seem a bit bitter. Perhaps I’d feel the same if I
had a sludge claim that I felt Toyota was ignoring. Could
that be what is fueling the fire within you? Do you feel
Toyota has cheated you out of something it owed you? Would
you please be so kind as to level with us about your
experience, your involvement with the petition, and briefly
explain why this is such a hot issue for you.

Second, you seem to have a singular view of the facts that
are presented in the settlement – at least not the views one
gets from a plain reading of the agreement. (see link to the
settlement agreement at the bottom of the article).
Specifically, (1) your comment indicates that there are a
greater number of vehicles out there that Toyota has agreed
to repair than those that are listed on the table in the
settlement documentation and (2) that the manufacturer has
in some way used “loopholes” to limit its financial
exposure. Beyond that, you all but name Toyota in a
conspiracy theory to sabotage the online petition drive.

Since I’d love to know what you know, could you please name
the vehicles the lawsuit covers that are not listed in the
settlement agreement, and explain the loopholes and sabotage
of which you write. Your sources would be invaluable in
objectively weighing the facts.

Thanks for posting and we look forward to your future
comments on this story and others."

On 2/11/07, Charlene Blake wrote:
> I have been doing auto consumer work for the past decade.
> Since my involvement in the Toyota engine oil sludge (well
> documented by journalists, consumer agencies, and Toyota
> owners) matter, some who are attempting to protect the
> automaker have continued to harass, intimidate, and defame
> me publicly.
>
> The hope is that the distraction and confusion will coax
> auto consumers to reject my consumer information. I
> believe the intent is to diminish and/or end the public
> dialogue about this serious engine problem and to limit
the
> effectiveness of my consumer networking.
>
> What measures can be taken in such cases? My name as an
> advocate is out there, but I am not a public figure in the
> true sense. What legal measures are available to me?
>
> The "cyberstalker(s)" have used aliases and even posed as
> me in order to discredit. One in particular lives in
> Canada and uses Sprint for his internet access. He
> impersonated me on a private blog, and the "owner" of the
> blog revealed this information publicly."