Okay, Seriously Eddie Coates (SunDevil, Great Shooter)?
 

sundevil ‎(9:43 PM):
again you want to defend those against me
sundevil ‎(9:44 PM):
its all good
sundevil ‎(10:05 PM):
yes i have many pror convictions I am a big pussy
I am going back to my old ways, fuck the porn biz
You have no clue who I am and what i do
sundevil ‎(10:06 PM):
except that I tried to go legit and be honest with scumbag porn peeps
But now i have been pushed backed, come gets some
I am glutting for punisment and death
let do it i am done

I don't know if anyone has told you, but I'm not trying to fight you. Sending me these messages on ICQ is not going to help your case at all when you assault someone and these come up.

How you are still on this board and not in prison already is completely beyond me.

But since you have decided to threaten ME now, you better hope to GOD you don't take action on anything you just wrote me, because you WILL end up back in prison AND have a pretty hefty civil suit thrown at you.

I would STRONGLY advise you never to contact me again as I am saving all the convos and screenshots from this point on and they will surface if anything ever happens. Don't even try to backpeddle and apologize saying I am taking this out of context, because frankly even YOU can't be stupid enough to think I'm going to take that as "ha ha he's just trying to prove a point."

Enjoy your life, I wish you the best of luck, and I certainly hope you get your shit together by the time you are 40.


If anyone thinks that AMA Joe, Keeping It Real and Nikki Licks are just out to attack Raymond Eddie Coates AKA Eddie Coates AKA SunDevilAngels AKA Great Shooter - this is a pretty clear cut example of how off the rocker this guy is.

Him and I were having a peaceful conversation on ICQ until I went to sleep before I had to go to work, and since I was late I just got around to checking this now.

For what it's worth this is the last thing I sent to him -

jonoso ‎(7:55 AM):
honestly dude, i'd lay low, do your shit, make money - forget about gfy for awhile
jonoso ‎(7:56 AM):
if you're making enough money shooting content, keep it up
it's more than most people can say

Only in an attempt to diffuse the situation as he obviously feels the need to defend himself to EVERYONE, myself included - even though he doesn't know that him and I have talked through text before as well as through email before I started posting on the board again and frankly I didn't care for anything he had to say but brushed it off.



cliffs: Eddie is a moron and would be best to just forget he said anything to me threatening, as I take my personal well being VERY seriously. :2 cents:

Hope he sues you for Defamation and Slander, and take away your computer

I hope I quit porn because of you.

and some people say I don't have a purpose ....

The world needs future suicide victims.

why do you wait then? You could save your friend Coates some time if you do his work

he scares me. I pooped a little.

:1orglaugh

Defamation? :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

I see you also do not know the difference between slander and libel :winkwink:

Be sure to save this stuff. I have a pile of ICQ logs of his threats and names calling. good to keep that stuff handy.
I feel for ya. I know how he gets first hand, but these threats are a bit further out. I am forwarding these on....will hit you up ICQ

My new favorite quote... lol

interweb amateur. red reads shitty on dark grey.

I don't know what I'm doing and can't figure out how to edit it now. :1orglaugh

I just ... okay I suck at the internets.

too late to edit. Next time use yellow.;)

"slander" and "libel" are only the legal terms used to descripe what kind of Defamation it is.

And im sorry if my english isent perfect, but lets see how many languages you speak or write, and lets see how well you do in those that arent your native language... Idiot

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Quote edit was perfect - you forgot to add in 'i'm so awesome i've rooted every single girl in my home town'

No problem, I was not getting on you about your English. Actually you write pretty well.

Slander is spoken
Libel is written

That's is the difference. So he would need to sue for Libel, which there is no case for that at this time ;)

Idiot......OK......:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Not to mention that defamation, libel, slander and whatever else Eddie wants to make up is ONLY ILLEGAL WHEN IT'S FALSE.

Considering I've not posted anything that's falsified, or damaging (Eddie does that well enough on his own), I have committed no crime, and therefore have done nothing wrong.

So... not sure how he would even get a judge to accept a case like that in order to "take my computer" away.

But then again, I'm not lawyer and I didn't go to no fancy prison law school so I probably don't know what I'm talking about. I'm too busy being an internet entreprenwhatever and working for roto rooter in my area and servicing only women. Or whatever.

Nope - when you write something like this, where the only porpose is to defame the person, you are beraking said law.

If YOU feel he breaks the law, then you report it to the police instead of breaking the law yourself

...........

ONLY IF ITS UNTRUE.

If i say you are a KKK member and you ARE I'm not defaming your character when its true just because you look stupid.

You apparently have little to no understanding of US law. It's not UN law.

Here you go, you might want to read this.

What Are Defamation, Libel and Slander?

Generally speaking, defamation is the issuance of a false statement about another person, which causes that person to suffer harm. Slander involves the making of defamatory statements by a transitory (non-fixed) representation, usually an oral (spoken) representation. Libel involves the making of defamatory statements in a printed or fixed medium, such as a magazine or newspaper.

Typically, the elements of a cause of action for defamation include:

1. A false and defamatory statement concerning another;
2. The unprivileged publication of the statement to a third party (that is, somebody other than the person defamed by the statement);
3. If the defamatory matter is of public concern, fault amounting at least to negligence on the part of the publisher; and
4. Damage to the plaintiff.

In the context of defamation law, a statement is "published" when it is made to the third party. That term does not mean that the statement has to be in print.

Damages are typically to the reputation of the plaintiff, but depending upon the laws of the jurisdiction it may be enough to establish mental anguish.

Most jurisdictions also recognize "per se" defamation, where the allegations are presumed to cause damage to the plaintiff. Typically, the following may consititute defamation per se:

* Attacks on a person's professional character or standing;
* Allegations that an unmarried person is unchaste;
* Allegations that a person is infected with a sexually transmitted disease;
* Allegations that the person has committed a crime of moral turpitude;

While actions for defamation have their roots in common law, most jurisdictions have now enacted statutes which modify the common law. They may change the elements of the cause of action, limit when an action may be filed, or modify the defenses to an action for defamation. Some may even require that the defendant be given an opportunity to apologize before the plaintiff can seek non-economic damages.



So please look through all of my posts and tell me where I did any of this. Don't worry, I'll wait.

Breaking the law??? on GFY?? slander and libel.. ARE YOU KIDDING?

Judge would have a heart attack in laughter, back to work now everyone.

No - because its "unlawful interference with privacy"

Look it up idiot

I hope you are a better DJ than armchair lawyer - but I dont expect it

Look what up?

Please show me anything regarding "unlawful interference with privacy" in United States law because I can't find anything.

I don't know where I ever said I am currently a DJ. Not that anyone cares but I am a General Manager, not a DJ, though I definitely enjoyed it. Nothing wrong with that.

I'm not armchairing anything - you're the one who brought up the law in your seemingly desperate attempt to defend someone that continually proves himself to be maniacal at best.


Fact of the matter is - you're quoting laws that aren't specific to the United States, which make them completely irrelevant.

I even UNDERLINED the source, and yet you are unable to find it?

Article 17 of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.
2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Link: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm

Its an agreement under international law the the US have signed

Read a little closer, UNLAWFUL...

I'm done arguing with you, as we just keep going back and forth and aren't getting anywhere.

Yes, and YOUR interference with his privacy is UNLAWFUL. That is the part you seem to fucking stupid to understand.

Here is how the legal system works:
PersonA breaks the law by making threats to PersonB ->
PersonB then report it to the authorities that will take care of PersonA


In your case you deside to break the law yourself, and use his acts as a exchuse.

Its the adult equivelant of the "he started it" replies kids give you, when you catch them doing stuff they arent allowed to. But I guess that is the intellectual level you operate on mr DJ

are all you content shooters slow and braindead?

no, only the loud and unsuccessful group of them

Youve just described GFY to a T

His privacy? This has absolutely nothing to do with privacy.

Had the OP been listening in on a private conversation between the Eddie guy and someone else, that would be a (possibly unlawful) violation of privacy. This, on the other hand, most definitely is not.

If you called me right now and told me that last night in your living room you covered your entire body with peanut butter, I would be free to tell the rest of the world.

Nope. If what you said was true, nobody ever needed a releaseform

RELEASE FORM ??? for a conversation ???

You don't need one for it to be legal. You need one to prove it.

In the case of the conversation, you could claim that I was lying, or had found out by spying on you instead of being told by you. In a court case, it would be your word against mine.

However, with a medium like ICQ, you take away that problem - the logs can serve as proof that the conversation did indeed take place.

It's why negotiations on business deals and such often involve non disclosure agreements. Without them, people would be free to talk about what happened and what was said.

Releaseforms is used for everything, not just images.

Not true. He takes something (text or images) that was intende for privat use, and publish it in a way the producer (in this case the one that wrote the message) did not intend it, and formulated/edited in a way where the only purpuse of it, was to defame the person.

That is why he broke the law


The mainpurpose of most non disclosure agreements, is not to prevent people from talking, but to specify what the cost would be if they did break the silence, and what topics in included in those terms

Stop being a fucking idiot.

Why? are you affraid I will break your monopoly? dont worry, I could never meassure up to you when it comes to being a idiot

If you could sue someone merely for posting ICQ logs and emails on the internet, the courts would never hear anything else.

I think none of you guys are producing decent content. All of you are involved in this childish crap. We aren't in high school any more.

I can't make up my mind if I love or hate this thread.

Yellow is the ghey and makes my elbow itch. :disgust

and if he could sure me for posting a icq log i could counter sue for spam cause the msgs were received and not wanted and he even sent me more after i told him not to contact me :2 cents:

I'm just glad icq has a ignore button and that I chose to use it cause unlike Eddie I have tons of shit to do rather than get threats all day from him online

KrisH,
You can not win with Armchair and Keyboard Warroirs. I finally realize that now.
The more I defend myself, the more they twist my words around just as you pointed out.

I know I have not done the things they say I have done.
Now I am being compared to Charles Manson, warning all agents and models to stay away from me. Joe says That he is afraid that I may harm , kidnap and murder a model
indirectly, by stating that: He is afraid for the models life, that he is afraid that a model will disappear if she shoots with me.
Joe and KIR are doing their very best to defame me and my name.

Here written, typed and published on the boards, they have comitted Libel -defecation of my character, and lively hood.

If he Joe Loughlin is actually calling all the agents, and all models he knows and telling them the same thing, then it is slander, spoken word of untruthfulness.

See Joe doesnt realize, the agents work with me as i send them female talent.
So he is interfering with their business as well. They will testify to what he is telling them.

Again I am not going to address KIR, JOE , Nikki Licks and Jon.

I am saying you can not win with any of these fucks!

So with that said, I am done talking to these lames.

I am going to do what i do, shoot good content of hot girls! If you dont like it GO FUCK YOURSELF!!!

GO FUCK YOURSELF !!! GO FUCK YOURSELF !!! GO FUCK YOURSELF !!! GO FUCK YOURSELF !!! GO FUCK YOURSELF !!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interna...tical_Righ ts

The Senate ratified with reservations, understandings, and declarations. They ratified it in a way that prevented these said rights found in the covenant and left no rights to them in US courts.

http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/...4.01-5014.html

See Buell, 274 F.3d at 372. "`Courts in the United States are bound to give effect to international law and to international agreements, except that a `non-self-executing' agreement will not be given effect as law in the absence of necessary authority.'" Id. (quoting Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law § 111 (1987)). When the Senate ratified the ICCPR, it specifically declared that the provisions thereof were "not self-executing." 138 Cong. Rec. S4784. And, since that time, Congress has never "enacted implementing legislation for" the ICCPR. Buell, 274 F.3d at 372; see Beazley, 242 F.3d at 267-68 (citing cases and other sources indicating that the ICCPR is not self-executing).

Btw, most if any agreements the USA makes are not self executing. There is absolutely no way in our system of government you can get 2/3 of Senators to give away American sovereignty, which in other words is their own power away to international bodies. The next time you watch a vote on C-Span about an international agreement watch the vote prior to it because that will be the vote that strips everything out.

content shooter fights are the best.

Yes indeed you are so right. But in my case I dont feel good about the fight at all.

I am a content shooter that other content shooters love to hate.

If I have done any of the serious things they have said I have done I would be arrested and charged with Felonies.

Here you go everyone, you can go here to see if i have been brought up on any type of felony charges of any kind concerning a models well being ,
as I am located in Phx, Arizona - Maricopa County.
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/Docket/ You can look up anything there!

Guess what, I am not up on any of the serious things they say i have done to models!

Have fun!

Depends on the content of the log, and the purpose

Source: http://www.citmedialaw.org

QFT! :1orglaugh