Within this broader condemnation of [Alice Perrers'] behaviour, a number of specific themes can be identified. These include sexual immorality, political influence, and [...] numerous and repeated references to greed and avarice. This is particularly striking in two literary representations which may have been inspired by Alice: Chaucer’s Wife of Bath and, most compelling, William Langland’s Lady Meed in his allegorical poem Piers Plowman, a character whose name has become a byword for venality. Meed, like Alice, established her presence at the royal court and acted as a counsellor to the king, but was eventually banished on accusations of being a whore and undermining the workings of law and justice. In particular, in introducing Meed to his audience, Langland describes her hands as covered with rings of the “purest perreize,” a word meaning precious stones or jewels, which would seem to be a play on Alice’s surname, Perrers, and thus directly identifying her with Meed. Chaucer also notably named the wife in the Wife of Bath Alisoun, raising the possibility that she was in part based on his direct contemporary Alice Perrers. The Wife had a husband named Jankyn, similar to the name of Alice’s first husband, Janyn, and was a businesswoman with a mercantile and urban background, echoing Alice’s own early life in London. The Wife was notoriously prolific in her lustful desires, but invariably they had a financial motivation, fusing, in the words of Paul Strohm, “the categories of economic and sexual assertiveness into a single epitome of contemporary male dread.”

-Laura Tompkins, '"Edward III's Gold-Digging Mistress": Alice Perrers, Gender, and Financial Power at the English Royal Court, 1360-1377", "Women and Economic Power in Premodern Courts" (edited by Cathleen Sarti)

love the division in the tags between people writing screeds about how fictional cheating makes them feel bad and/or is 'manufactured conflict' (? but doctor...) and people just saying 'read/watch the age of innocence'

Go after everyone that put your entire families life in danger. Thank you for your service and I hope no one has to endure what you guys had to ever again.

We should be GRATEFUL that Elayne never got chance to meet Lanfear. She would choose her as her life idol. Like yes finally woman who understands importance of magical mad stem AND being campy dramatic madwoman eating the scenery

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.

Exhibit A:

Exhibit B:

Exhibit C:

Exhibit D:

Your honor, I rest my case.

this is a daisy jones and the six account now

Officer Immune from Suit                                                                                                                    

Insurance for State of Delaware Waives Sovereign Immunity

Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gUZqz9kE, see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gN_MYPbK and at https://lnkd.in/g-3Pn_-T, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4800 post.

Post 4803

On February 15, 2023, Kimberly Letke (“Plaintiff”) filed a pro se Complaint against Defendant Matthew Sprinkle (“Sprenkle”) for defamation and malicious prosecution.  On October 3, 2023, Plaintiff filed another Complaint added Defendants Cpl. Tyler Beulter of the DNREC police (“Beulter”) and the Attorney General of Delaware, Kathleen Jennings (“Jennings”), in which she added three additional claims: false arrest and violations of public trust, unlawful detention, and violations of her rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

In Kimberly Letke v. Matthew Sprenkle, CPL. Tyler Beulter, and Attorney General Kathleen Jennings, C.A. Nos. S23C-10-019 CAK, S23C-10-002 CAK, Superior Court of Delaware (May 6, 2024) the court was faced with a Motion to Dismiss based upon sovereign immunity.

FACTS

Sprenkle hunted and harvested a deer in Cape Henlopen State Park, allegedly trespassing on Plaintiff’s neighbor’s property to reach the Park. Plaintiff shouted at Sprenkle and called the police. The police spoke with Sprenkle and ultimately arrested Plaintiff for a violation of the Delaware statute prohibiting impeding lawful hunting. The charge was ultimately dropped. Plaintiff’s claims, including those for defamation and malicious prosecution spring from that incident and the statements that Sprenkle allegedly made to Beulter about Plaintiff.

Absolute Immunity

The doctrine of sovereign immunity provides that the State of Delaware, including its agencies, can only be sued by consent, or by an express act of the General Assembly. When the State has not waived sovereign immunity, the Court does not have to consider whether the State Tort Claims Act is applicable. The Court has dismissed in the past claims against Delaware state agency defendants where the state agency defendants submitted an affidavit from the Insurance Coverage Administrator of the State of Delaware affirming that the State had not purchased any insurance coverage for such claims. Without a waiver of sovereign immunity, the Court held that plaintiffs’ claims were barred, and therefore, the Court was not required to consider whether the State Tort Claims Act was applicable.

Qualified Immunity

Assuming arguendo that there is not absolute sovereign immunity for Beulter, or that the State has waived sovereign immunity with respect to him or his agency, the doctrine of qualified immunity bars Plaintiff’s claims against Beulter. When properly applied, qualified immunity protects all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.

ANALYSIS

Plaintiff’s claims against Beulter are founded upon an alleged act or omission arising out of the performance of his official duty, and, therefore, is barred by the qualified immunity statute.

First, all actions surrounding Plaintiff’s arrest were in the performance of an official duty.

Second, there is nothing in the Complaint, other than what may be fairly read as mere accusations, that indicates Beulter was not acting in good faith.

Third, there is nothing in the Complaint that indicates that Beulter acted with gross or wanton negligence.

For the reasons discussed above, Defendant Beulter’s Motion to Dismiss was GRANTED.

ZALMA OPINION

No one likes being arrested. Regardless you cannot sue a police officer or a prosecutor for defamation if everything they did was part of their official duties. The state of Delaware allows the state to waive sovereign immunity only if the state has bought insurance to protect it against such claims. Since there was no insurance protecting the officer he was immune from the suit.

(c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.

Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.

Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/c/c-262921; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg.

Subscribe to my substack at https://lnkd.in/gmmzUVBy, videos at Rumble.com at https://lnkd.in/gV9QJYH; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://lnkd.in/g2hGv88.

Go to X @bzalma;Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk.

Here is a brief summary of what is happening in Wikipedia right now:

In the last few years (3-4 years) the WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, which was originally created to improve the quality and coverage of native issues and native articles on wikipedia, has been hijacked by a small number of users with an extremist agenda. They have been working diligently over the last few years to change the definition of both what it means to be an Indigenous American and even what it means to be state and federally recognized.

The four or five key players (Mainly Editor Yuchitown, Bohemian Baltimore, ARoseWolf, (now retired editor CorbieVreccan, Netherzone and Oncamera) who are part of the “Native American Articles Improvement Project” started implementing these changes slowly, but they started pursuing their goals aggressively after November 2023, when state-recognized tribes retained their voting rights in NCAI. Essentially, after the movement to delegitimize state-recognized tribes failed officially, the key players doubled down on altering and controlling the flow of information about Native Americans through Wikipedia.

The talk page of Lily Gladstone’s article has a relevant discussion here. Initially, the leaders of the WikiProject removed any reference to her being a “Native American Actress” and instead had her as “Self-identifying as Blackfoot” and “Self-identifying as Nez Perce” because her blood quantum was too low to be enrolled in either tribe.

You can see some of the discussion here:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lily_Gladstone

Eventually they relented and changed her category to being “Of Nez Perce Descent” but you can see in the discussion that they are referring to an article that these editors (Yuchitown, Bohemian Baltimore, and CorbieVreccan) themselves appeared to have mostly written and revised:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_identity_in_the_United_States

This statement is very much at odds with even the government’s description, as seen below;

The DOJ Office of Tribal Justice Office on their webpage “Frequently Asked Questions About Native American”, question “Who is an American Indian or Alaskan Native” states:

“As a general principle, an Indian is a person who is of some degree Indian blood and is recognized as an Indian by a Tribe and/or the United States. No single federal or tribal criterion establishes a person's identity as an Indian. Government agencies use differing criteria to determine eligibility for programs and services. Tribes also have varying eligibility criteria for membership.”

In addition, “List” pages have been created on Wikipedia for federally and state recognized tribes. The Wikipedia “List” page for state-recognized tribes is inaccurate in its interpretation of state recognition and not supported by expert reliable sources--(1) Cohen’s Handbook of Federal Indian Law 2012 edition, (2) NCSL.org current stand on state recognition (not the archived list from 2017 which NCSL no longer supports), (3) Koenig & Stein’s paper “Federalism and the State Recognition of Native American Tribes: a survey of state-recognized tribes and state recognition processes across the United States” (both 2008 & updated 2013 in book “ Recognition, sovereignty struggles, and indigenous rights in the United States: A sourcebook”)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-recognized_tribes_in_the_United_States

State-recognized tribes who have received recognition through less formal but acceptable means have been moved from the Wikipedia list page on state-recognized tribes to the Wikipedia list page of unrecognized or self-identifying organizations.

The Wiki page "List of organizations that self-identify as Native American tribes", in particular, is being used to purposely defame legitimate Native American individuals who are members of the tribes/Native communities that are on this list. 

By the parameters set up on Wikipedia, only the colonizer’s governments can acknowledge who is Native American through either federal recognition or state recognition. If an individual is not a member of a federally or state-recognized tribe, then it is determined that they cannot be Native American and are, instead, considered “self-identifying” or only “a descendant of ...” (example Lily Gladstone). As a result, Native individuals are currently being tagged as “self-identifying” and their names are put on “list” pages that strongly imply they are “pretend” Indians.

These editors have indicated that they would like “self-identification” to be the default setting for any people who they deem do not fit within the parameters that they themselves created within Wikipedia.

Moreof, these editors are admin and senior editors within the Wikiproject Indigenous Peoples of North America, and are being called in specifically to weigh on Native Identity, and any project involving any Indigenous Group.

Any attempt to correct misinformation, add information, or change any of these articles is often met with being blocked, reported for various offenses, or reported for having a Conflict of Interest, whether or not that is actually applicable. They have use this strategically in many different pages for many different individuals and groups within the scope of their Wikiprojects.

While changing things in Wikipedia does not change the truth, it is a way to control how most people take in information, and thus they hope to manipulate the narrative to better suit their goals.

This is quick and messy but:

Here is a link to the google document with the other state recognized tribes (Including yours) that were edited by these editors. This is an incomplete list so far that only goes back to September 2023 but I am going to add to it. If you can add to your own part of this list, and send your complaints and information to the arbitrator committee (the email is below) with the involved editors, this will help our case.

The  more tribes who complain, and the more Wikipedia editors complain, the better our case will be. 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YNDEjLTrrZ_mMIRCVxtvt69FwCYpJWKs71lBhWa5a9M/edit?usp=sharing

The place to make complaints on Wikipedia is oversight-en-wpwikipedia.org , and

arbcom-enwikimedia.org . It is most helpful to have an editing account on Wikipedia, because Yuchitown and the others will try to defend themselves using Wikipedia methodology and make anyone who confronts them look like the aggressor (see the other tribes who tried to fight back on Wikipedia I found).

The more people and tribes make complaints the more likely it is that this will work and we can rid ourselves of these monsters.

Some of the tribes I have spoken to are taking legal action against these editors. Any groups affected by their policies should also reach out to the news to make knowledge of this more widespread.

Thank you

- quoted with permission from an email sent by an associate of my tribe. Message me for their email address if you'd like to reach out to them.

Can't sleep, thinking about the Muslim guy at work again

Did something toxic and now I feel bad

Sicilian mobster asks judge to order seizure of Roberto Saviano book

Giuseppe Graviano files for defamation against Gomorrah author over origin of nickname

A Sicilian mobster has asked a judge to order the seizure of all copies of a book by the author Roberto Saviano, who is living under police protection after he faced death threats for exposing mafia secrets.

Giuseppe Graviano, who is serving a life sentence in a maximum security prison, filed a lawsuit for defamation last week against the author of books including Gomorrah, and Solo è il Coraggio (Lonely is the Courage), about the life of the judge Giovanni Falcone, who was killed by the mafia in 1992.

In a document written in his own hand and addressed to the Trento prosecutor’s office, Graviano claims Saviano’s book on Falcone contains inaccuracies about him, in particular about his nickname. According to Saviano, Graviano was nicknamed “Mother Nature” because he had the power to grant or take life. The mafia boss says, however, that he earned it for being “very altruistic”.

Graviano asked the court in Trento to seize and withdraw all copies of the book from Italian bookshops.

According to magistrates, the 59-year-old was one of the organisers of bombing campaigns in Milan, Rome and Florence in 1993, together with Matteo Messina Denaro, the mobster arrested this month after 30 years on the run.

Saviano said: “Graviano’s request is … proof that the power of intimidation of the mafia never ends. As strange as it may seem, the mobsters are not afraid of someone writing about them, but they fear how they write about them.”

In 2006, Gomorrah revealed the secrets of the Neapolitan mafia. Since then he has lived in hiding, emerging only under police escort.

Quarter Notes: Blurbs & Briefs from Sound Bites

SUSAN TEDESCHI, DAVE GROHL TO RECEIVE BICENTENNIAL MEDAL: Susan Tedeschi and Dave Grohl will receive the James Smithson Bicentennial medal for “contributions to the American experience through music.”

The ceremony is scheduled for Dec. 8 in Washington, D.C.

HANUKKAH SESSIONS ON TAP: Dave Grohl reportedly hosted a live Hanukkah Sessions concert Dec. 5 in Los Angeles before 250 fans. Nine songs were performed and the thinking is eight of them will be released for Grohl’s third-annual celebration of Jewish musicians during the Festival of Lights Dec. 18-26.

Proceeds from the show benefit the Anti-Defamation League.

ICEHOUSE CANCELS GIG CITING LONG COVID: Icehouse canceled its Dec. 12 gig at the Sydney Opera House because of Iva Davies’ “ongoing aftereffects of COVID-19,” per a statement.

“If there was any possible way I could do this performance, then I would move heaven and earth to do so,” Davies said.

DUSTING OFF THOSE RUSTY STRINGS JUST ONE MORE TIME: Infamous Stringdusters Andy Falco (guitar) and Travis Book (bass) will do a five-show tour - Jan. 24-28, 2023 - under the Falco & Book Play Jerry Garcia banner.

12/7/22

Fascinating when people get upset at me for using book pages in my art. Modern books can be printed on demand, are often sold at thrift stores for a dollar, sometimes are given to me for the intent to destroy them. They aren't bibles, they aren't holy books, they don't carry information that isn't already widely available.

They can't feel pain when I tear out the pages, even though sometimes I wish they could. The author doesn't lose money. The author is not defamed. The author is not hurt.

The only thing that the world misses out on is a single copy of Art of the Deal that my friend Cait was forced to buy for her economics class for some reason. I think Donald Trump can handle the humiliation of having a portrait of Christine Jorgensen painted on one of his books.

After Health Provider Entity's Management is Arrested for Fraud Reporting Suspicion to Beneficiaries is not Defamation

Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gvC28cS4, see the full video at https://lnkd.in/giQW_bJK and at https://lnkd.in/gYSqE46x, and https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4750 posts.

BrainBuilders, LLC appealed from an order granting summary judgment in favor of defendants Optum, Inc., et al (collectively, defendants) in Brainbuilders, LLC v. Optum, Inc., Optum Services, Inc., et al, No. A-0621-22, Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division (April 19, 2024) resolved claims of defamation.

FACTS

Letters dated July 25, 2017 and August 2017 sent by the Optum entities to BrainBuilders' patients following an investigation into purported fraud by individuals associated with BrainBuilders.

BrainBuilders provides healthcare services to children on the autism spectrum. As an out-of-network or non-participating healthcare provider, BrainBuilders receives reimbursement for claims only if a patient's health insurance plan allowed "out-of-network benefits" or the insurer made a "single case agreement" for the patient's care.

The Optum entities are the health claims administrator for health plans issued or administered by the Oxford entities and UHC entities. The Optum entities do not sell or issue health insurance policies. Rather, they provide support for defendants who issued health insurance policies to individual insureds. The Optum entities also evaluate insurance claims submitted by providers to its affiliated insurers, including BrainBuilders. The Optum entities often investigate whether a provider has requested reimbursement beyond the provider's entitlement, such as by misrepresenting or inflating the services provided.

In June 2017, four individuals related to the management of BrainBuilders were arrested and charged with conspiracy to defraud Medicaid. A criminal complaint, alleging misappropriation of funds, was filed against several individuals affiliated with BrainBuilders. The arrests were reported in the news media and the Optum entities learned of the arrests on July 14, 2017.

Subsequently the Optum entities sent letters to BrainBuilders' patients insured by the Oxford and UHC entities (July 2017 letters). The July 2017 letters explained the Optum entities were suspending payment for services provided by BrainBuilders due to potential insurance fraud and other violations of state and federal law.

BrainBuilders sued defendants asserting the following causes of action:

1 conspiracy; 2 tortious interference with business relations; 3 tortious interference with prospective economic advantage; 4 negligence trade libel; 5 defamation, libel, and slander; and 6 unjust enrichment and 7 quantum meruit.

BrainBuilders alleged the statements in the July and August 2017 letters were false and defamatory. Defendants moved for summary judgment and the motion judge granted defendants' motion and dismissed BrainBuilders' claims with prejudice. Further, around the same time period, the judge noted the Optum entities "separately uncovered evidence suggesting BrainBuilders was engaged in fraud, waste, or abuse." Thus, the judge concluded, "[w]hen read with context, no reasonable person" could interpret the July or August 2017 letters "as fallacious or injurious.

The law of defamation is grounded on the principle that people should be free to enjoy their reputations unimpaired by false and defamatory attacks. To prevail on a defamation claim, a party must demonstrate: (1) the assertion of a false and defamatory statement concerning another; (2) the unprivileged publication of that statement to a third party; and (3) fault amounting at least to negligence by the publisher.

True Statements are not Actionable as Defamation.

Our courts have stated that true statements are absolutely protected under the First Amendment from liability for defamation. The allegedly defamatory statements in the July and August 2017 letters related to BrainBuilders' "potential fraud," potential "violations of state and federal law," and concerns for "quality of care or member safety." It is uncontroverted that several of BrainBuilders' officers were arrested for conspiracy to defraud Medicaid in association with "income they received from BrainBuilders." These individuals were arrested because they potentially committed fraud. Additionally, the arrests raised legitimate concerns regarding the quality of care rendered by BrainBuilders.

Moreover, BrainBuilders claimed it conferred only benefits to the insured members and not defendants. Under these circumstances, the Appellate Division was satisfied BrainBuilders failed to proffer any support for its unjust enrichment and quantum meruit claims.

ZALMA OPINION

It takes a certain amount of unmitigated gall to sue for defamation an entity that reported that the plaintiffs officers were arrested for Medicaid fraud, a major felony. Their officers were arrested - albeit I could find no report on the result of the charges - for insurance fraud, telling their customers about the arrests in good faith is not defamation since the statements were true.

(c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.

Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.

Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe

Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/c/c-262921; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg.

Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk.

Subscribe to my substack at https://lnkd.in/gmmzUVBy

Go to X @bzalma; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://lnkd.in/gV9QJYH; Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk.

[The Economist is Private UK Media]

Making someone do porridge (or “eat rice and beans”, to use the Korean expression) for expressing their political views is [...] not generally associated with [South Korea]. Yet Lee Yoon-seop, a South Korean poet, is currently languishing in prison for just this. The 68-year-old was sentenced to 14 months in November for threatening South Korea’s “existence and security”. His crime? Writing a poem in praise of the North.

The law used to prosecute Mr Lee, the National Security Act (nsa), is designed to protect South Korea from spies and traitors. But it also bans South Koreans from visiting or making contact with the North, reading or watching North Korean media or saying anything good about Kim Jong Un’s [...] regime. Though South Korea replaced its former military dictatorship with a democracy in 1987, such restrictions on free speech show that some of the generals’ autocratic tendencies endure.[...]

The NSA was modelled on a law designed to quash pro-independence activities during Japan’s occupation of Korea from 1910 to 1945. Since 2003 there have on average been more than 60 NSA prosecutions a year, often for pretty clear espionage cases. A businessman and an army officer were arrested for allegedly selling military secrets to North Korea. Soldiers in the South have been prosecuted under the act for endangering morale by distributing pro-North propaganda.

But the NSA is too often used to prosecute satirists and raid the homes and offices of leftists. Some cases have been ridiculous. Kim Myeong-soo, a PhD student, received six months in prison and a two-year suspended sentence for selling books on North Korea that were widely available in public libraries. A South Korean woman was given a two-year sentence, suspended for four years, for owning recordings of 14 North Korean songs.

This is not Mr Lee’s first offence. But the claim that the sexagenarian posed a threat to South Korea is absurd. His ode was published on a North Korean website. Access to such sites is banned by the NSA and forbidden from a South Korean IP address. [...] It consists of a list of South Korean problems that Mr Kim, in the poet’s view, would instantly solve given the chance.

Mr Lee’s real offence appears to have been believing his own nonsense. By contrast, police decided not to investigate a man under the draconian law for selling shirts with a smiling Mr Kim and the slogan “Walk a flowery path, comrade”. That was OK, officials said, because he was selling them to make a buck.

Worse, the issue points to a broader authoritarian tendency in the South. Its president, Yoon Suk-yeol, often demonises his political opponents by calling them “anti-state forces”, a phrase lifted directly from the NSA. Unfavourable press coverage is routinely labelled “fake news” and the offices of offending outlets have been raided. The administration and its allies have sued more press outfits for defamation—which in South Korea can be a crime even when the offending words are manifestly true—in Mr Yoon’s first 18 months in office than any of its three predecessors did in total.

Yet even a more liberal government would be unlikely to remove the NSA’s illiberal clauses. No administration has made a serious attempt to address it in 20 years. There is no significant political support for scrapping the law [...]. The current administration at least flirted with allowing South Koreans access to North Korean media, but recently abandoned the idea. [...]

Mr Yoon talks often about South Korea’s democratic values. They are at the heart of his pitch for the country to be a strategic link between East and West, developed and developing countries. For that reason alone he should take them more seriously. South Korea is undoubtedly a democracy, but not a terribly liberal one so long as it locks up old men for their dotty opinions. Reforming the NSA would be a better rebuttal to the sentiment Mr Lee expressed than banning it.

22 Jan 24

Trump has been found by New York civil juries to have sexually assaulted and defamed E. Jean Carroll. A New York judge found that Trump’s business defrauded banks and the state of New York. More importantly, Trump’s efforts to corrupt elections have not been limited to concealing payments to adult performer Stormy Daniels. Trump was impeached once for extorting Ukraine to damage an electoral opponent. And as a majority of both the House and the Senate found in Trump’s second impeachment (and as the House Jan. 6 committee later documented in painstaking detail) Trump actively sought to steal the 2020 election. In short, Judge Merchan is not sentencing a defendant who merely cooked the books to hide one sordid affair, but a man with a proven pattern of abusing individuals, cheating at business and, most critically, corrupting the electoral process to gain and keep presidential power.

Why Donald Trump should go to jail after guilty trial verdict