The ultimate HB proof that Jay Windley = sVector

[dexter]

s160.photobucket.com/albums/t173/Michaelstmark/?start=20

They both wear white shirts and blue jeans, case closed! ;D

[JayUtah]

As a matter of fact the shirt I wore in the desert was tan, not white.

[dwight]

I dont want to state the blatantly obvious, but do these HOAX folk even briefly consider the concept of libel/slander and defamation at all? Or in their cocoon world do such things not concern them?

[BertL]

That's hilarious. Saying two people are the same, and basing it on their clothes. That's almost Monty Python funny, if it wasn't for the fact that this michaelstmark guy is serious about it.

[JayUtah]

Libel and slander do not concern them because personal attacks against their critics are their primary weapon.

The legal definition of defamation changes when the person knowingly consents to be given greater exposure than average. In agreeing to appear on a program I was informed would be broadcast to the world, I accepted that such exposure would bring about more attention, and that I had no right to expect only good attention. In other words, people who seek a greater audience than the average person legally must have a thicker skin for all kinds of criticism than the average person.

Defamation must make a statement that a reasonable person (i.e., a jury) would understand to be an allegation of fact. Taunting and teasing doesn't usually fit that category, distasteful though they may be. So if someone wanted to call Bart Sibrel an "a--hole," it wouldn't be defamation because normally it's considered one person's opinion, not a literal claim that he's that portion of the anatomy.

Defamation must defame. That is, a reasonable person would have to conclude that the statement, if true, would cause harm to a person's reputation. It's a continuing source of amusement that people confuse Svector with me. It's indeed an allegation of fact, but even if it were I don't currently suffer any damage to my reputation from such a mistaken identity. And I hope Svector doesn't. It may give conspiracy theorists something to gossip about, but so far it simply doesn't matter.

And the allegation must be false. That's the important point. True statements that harm someone's reputation do not defame him in a way that the law allows to be redressed. No, I'm not Svector.

There's also the question of malice. If you make a reasonable effort to uncover the truth and innocently say something untrue, and correct it subsequently, you're okay. If you know differently and say something, that's clearly malicious. But it's also malicious if you fail to exercise due diligence. Merely Googling around for tidbits of evidence doesn't generally let you allege as fact that two people are the same person.

There's really not enough defamation going on for me to worry about. My intended audience is really not the gossip-mongers anyway. When and if it becomes important to distinguish Svector from me, then I'll take action.

[dwight]

Agreed Jay. It just puzzles me that these guys just seem to go a-guns-a-blazing without any regard to consequences. Case in point Jarrah. I noticed his anti Apollo tirade has decreased as he is no longer allowed to rip off SF material. Had be bothered to either get SF permission, or acquire the NASA material himself, he could post as much YT material as his upload capacity would allow.

I guess seeing what Fox lawyers can do when they are fuelled up, makes me ever so cautious about what I openly write about someone. Others obviously dont share such thoughts.

[JayUtah]

I have a longer-term perspective. People like Jarrah White eventually self-destruct, or at least lose enough credibility through their behavior that they cease to become relevant. I leave him to himself because he doesn't need my help in order to lose his fight.

[dwight]

Jay I have no idea where you get your cool head from.

[sts60]

jayutah said:

I have a longer-term perspective. People like Jarrah White eventually self-destruct, or at least lose enough credibility through their behavior that they cease to become relevant. I leave him to himself because he doesn't need my help in order to lose his fight.

What credibility? Disregarding bored teenagers with no real attachment to the hoax notion one way or another, who really pays attention to him other than a handful of fervent HBs?

In fact, not that many people pay attention to us, either. It's simply not something the vast majority of people think about. But at least those who are interested can see us using our brains and willing to provide useful information.

[emcsq]

From what I see on his guy's rather diverse photobucket page, he appears to be basing his "Svector=Windley evidence" on quite abit more than just the same dress code, dexter, however humorously presented. This is my first dip into the AH forum and I was hoping for a little more fidelity of observation and reportage than that. However, I live in hope!
(I'll have a snoop around a couple more topic threads just now.)

[LunarOrbit]

Well, I wouldn't exactly say it's your first dip into the AH forum, it's at least your second... check you private messages, please.

[JayUtah]

I observe that I am not Svector. What should I have done differently? Upon what other criteria should I have examined the Photobucket user's argument?

[sts60]

Jay, can you tell me if images on that album come from the TV special you did, and/or svector's YouTube presentations?

[JayUtah]

Jay, can you tell me if images on that album come from the TV special you did...

They appear to be frame captures from that program, yes.

...and/or svector's YouTube presentations?

Couldn't say.

[Obviousman]

jayutah said:

Jay, can you tell me if images on that album come from the TV special you did...

They appear to be frame captures from that program, yes.

...and/or svector's YouTube presentations?

Couldn't say.

Couldn't...... or WON'T? (Cue dramatic music...)