Bunny Update

On lawyerly advice, I went down to the Northeast LA Police Station today to inquire about what can be done to keep my bunny out of that big, shiny pot. I brought incriminating printouts of threats written on the bunny-boiler’s website. Officer Kong, after treating me to a rant on how lawyers will make you do all sorts of crazy things, proceeded to read the printouts aloud to the entire front desk. Joy. Then he disappeared into the station to consult with a “detective and his superior.”

When Officer Kong returned, he informed me there was little the police could do, as the specific web entry did not specify me by name (even though it would take a mongoloid on a bad day or a Star Wars prequel screenwriter to not understand that it is directed at me), but that I could pursue a civil restraining order (where’s the oxymoron police when you need ’em).

But my favorite part was Officer Kong’s explanation that things published on a person’s website have a certain degree of privacy. “Like a diary,” he said. Um, doesn’t that overlook the whole idea of PUBLISHING something to the web? Does Defamer hide behind this argument?

So I guess it’s off to LA Superior Court for me.

3 Replies to “Bunny Update”

  1. Officer Kong is dead wrong about websites being private like a diary. Companies can fire over a personal blog (and have done so) and even private emails are admissible in court, so that would certainly be true for a public website.

    As long as you didn’t hack his login to get to the info, it’s admissible.

    On another note, maybe you want to handle this by bringing some attention to this person. Why not post the site and the person’s name here and let those who read take care of the guy (no, I’m not suggesting physical harm in any way) I just mean that a lot can be done through the internet to mess with his site or harass him back. Just a vengeful thought :)

Comments are closed.