Lori Alexander Does Not Understand the Difference Between Slander and Libel?

Lori Alexander Does Not Understand the Difference Between Slander and Libel? May 7, 2019

I am going to attempt to make this the very last post about hateful female cultural enforcer Lori Alexander for a long while. Her words about Rachel Held Evan’s death were bad enough, but toss in her calling Rachel a ‘heathen’ (I have screen caps), her claims that God has much less compassion than us because He is perfect (again, I have screen caps!) and now her claims she’s been slandered with no real understanding of her own misuse of the words it’s too much. By paying any attention to Lori here and in other places we’re merely feeding whatever type of personality disorder or possible mental illness lurking. A Lori-torium is in place for the next week or so.

Giving Lori attention is like giving attention to the guy in the circus freak show that bathes in a vat of worms in front of the crowd while gleefully eating a few. You know it cannot be healthy for him, you know it’s not mentally healthy for you, and you have trouble looking away.

Today she is claiming that all of us giving vent to criticism to her words are busy slandering her, or committing ‘character assassination’ She forgets several things. There are screen caps of everything she has said, even in her super secret chat room, and she does not understand the legal description of ‘slander.’

Dear Lori – here is what it is straight from a law website:

Defamation is an area of law that provides a civil remedy when someone’s words end up causing harm to your reputation or your livelihood. Libel is a written or published defamatory statement, while slander is defamation that is spoken by the defendant.

There goes Lori’s claims of slander because it does not meet the proof of slander. Slander is spoken, libel is written and notoriously hard to prove in a court of law.

If there were not copious screen caps proving everything she’s said she might have the tiniest, thinnest leg to stand on in a libel case. But she’s have a very hard time proving the damage to her livelihood and financial bottom line. Those are the only meters of damage the courts will look at. Has your financial bottom line been harmed by false statements by others?

Interestingly enough I am watching friend and fellow Patheos author Katie Joy of Without a Crystal Ball going through something very similar with poop cult leader Jillian Mai-Tai Epperly of the Jilly Juice protocol. Jillian has been openly harassing Katie and attempting to sue her in small claims court (wrong venue!) for libel.

Even though many journalists have now written about the deaths and permanent damage suffered by some of the people who’ve used Jillian’s poop protocol Jillian is solely focusing her ire on Katie Joe. Not Dr. Phil for exposing her lies on his show when he interviewed her, or the fleet of male journalists, male bloggers and male YouTube hosts that point out the dangers of Jilly Juice. Solely on Katie.

Epperly has also harassed other female journalists, but not with the same intense level of illegal actions and hatred she’s reserved for Katie Joy.

Both Jillian Epperly and Lori Alexander are fighting a losing battle if they think they can sue over the words of journalists about their pie in the sky wishful statements. Here’s what the law says on these situations.

Digital Media Law Project explains that the United States Constitution protects opinions and fair comments made by journalists.

“The right to speak guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution includes the right to voice opinions, criticize others, and comment on matters of public interest. It also protects the use of hyperbole and extreme statements when it is clear these are rhetorical ploys.

Accordingly, you can safely state your opinion that others are inept, stupid, jerks, failures, etc. even though these statements might hurt the subject’s feelings or diminish their reputations. Such terms represent what is called “pure opinions” because they can’t be proven true or false. As a result, they cannot form the basis for a defamation claim.”

Lori, legally you do not have a leg to stand upon. No matter your claims of martyrdom when you state things that the general public can take screen grabs of you forfeit any legal hope of claiming libel.

Now no Lori for awhile. Lori is openly busy compiling screen shots of Rachel Held Evans promoting vaccination and taking Tamaflu, like it is some sort of proof that Rachel was evil personified. I am wrung out with her constant disgraceful drama. Thankfully I have an entirely new slew of nasty female cultural enforcers to look at in the meantime.

Stay in touch! Like No Longer Quivering on Facebook:

If this is your first time visiting NLQ please read our Welcome page and our Comment Policy! Commenting here means you agree to abide by our policies.

Copyright notice: If you use any content from NLQ, including any of our research or Quoting Quiverfull quotes, please give us credit and a link back to this site. All original content is owned by No Longer Quivering and Patheos.com

Read our hate mail at Jerks 4 Jesus

Check out today’s NLQ News at NLQ Newspaper

Contact NLQ at SuzanneNLQ@gmail.com

Comments open below

NLQ Recommended Reading …

Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement by Kathryn Joyce

I Fired God by Jocelyn Zichtermann

13:24 A Dark Thriller by M Dolon Hickmon

About Suzanne Titkemeyer
Suzanne Titkemeyer went from a childhood in Louisiana to a life lived in the shadow of Washington D.C. For many years she worked in the field of social work, from national licensure to working hands on in a children's residential treatment center. Suzanne has been involved with helping the plights of women and children' in religious bondage. She is a ordained Stephen's Minister with many years of counseling experience. Now she's retired to be a full time beach bum in Tamarindo, Costa Rica with the monkeys and iguanas. She is also a thalassophile. She also left behind years in a Quiverfull church and loves to chronicle the worst abuses of that particular theology. She has been happily married to her best friend for the last 32 years. You can read more about the author here.

Browse Our Archives

Close Ad