Judge rules that Melinda Karlsson doesn't have to give Monika Caryk cyberbullying evidence

[Cellee]

I think it is functionally the same in the US.

Yes you can get arrested for violating it, but you don’t have to make much more than a de minimis showing of why you want it. It is designed to protect people in the absence of substantial evidence.

I think any time you can be arrested it is serious enough.

It seems like they are just ignoring this because they don't live anywhere near each other now.

Despite that the harassment defies the limitation of location.

I don't know who us telling the truth, but I see the point that the fiancee of Hoffman has been publically trashed with no real ability to defend herself. I don't like that.

 

[Crede777]

I think it's the fact that Melinda Karlsson directly accused Caryk that people are calling accusations because that's exactly what they are.

The only statements I have seen from the Karlssons are the ones made in a sworn court statement. I assume the messages alluded to in that statement exist and have been shown to the court. If they don’t exist, Caryk can’t sue because they fall under absolute privilege. However, the Karlssons would be guilty of perjury which is worse.

 

[Danythegod]

Well at least I can get back to enjoying my Sens with Karlsson and Hoffman in good standing.... Oh wait... FML.. #melnykout

 

[StoneHands]

The only statements I have seen from the Karlssons are the ones made in a sworn court statement. I assume the messages alluded to in that statement exist and have been shown to the court. If they don’t exist, Caryk can’t sue because they fall under absolute privilege. However, the Karlssons would be guilty of perjury which is worse.

I didn't realize you were referring to Caryk suing. I thought you meant that Karlsson never actually made any accusations directly pointing fingers at Caryk whether they were in court or in public.

 

[IslesNorway]

What if they both just turned their computers/mobiles in to the police for a thorough check? It would all solve itself really and prove guilt or innocence. Alternatively have their respective agents agree on a private investigator for the job.

 

[puckpilot]

Has anyone ever thought that maybe the reason the Karlssons haven't produced evidence was because said evidence may be embarrassing to them in some way and that they just want to move on?

I mean it's like, "Hey I know this person broke into my house."

"How do you know that, sir?"

"They have my goat-shaped monogrammed dild... ummm er... Never mind. Not pressing charges."

 

[IslesNorway]

She did accuse Caryk of 1000s of messages did she not? Should be fairly simple to prove in that case

 

[ophene]

Do we know what is happening with the police (and the league/senators) investigation? Will the results from the police investigation be released to the parties once its concluded or is that just if they choose to charge Caryk with something?

 

[Ms Maggie]

Who is Melinda Caryk?

Anyways does this mean Melinda Karlsson was lying the whole time?

Isn't this considered slander and caused Hoffman to lose his place of work?

Why would it mean that? Not familiar with Canadian laws but slander is very tough to prove in the US. Have to prove the accused knew the slander was untrue.

 

[DearDiary]

Mrs Karlsson must be believed, it's up to Mrs Hoffman to provide evidence that she didn't harass anyone. Until then, guilty until proven innocent.

 

[Robert Kentwood]

Has anyone ever thought that maybe the reason the Karlssons haven't produced evidence was because said evidence may be embarrassing to them in some way and that they just want to move on?

I mean it's like, "Hey I know this person broke into my house."

"How do you know that, sir?"

"They have my goat-shaped monogrammed dild... ummm er... Never mind. Not pressing charges."

I think it might be a case of they know it's her but can't prove it.

For example, the person making certain comments online are mentioning things that only the wives would know. Melinda intended to give the child a pink tutu when she was born. Then the person online said "No more pink tutu for your child. LOL". Something along those lines. Only the wives would know of the pink tutu, though you can't prove the person online was just making some random comment. Just my opinion.

 

[Jacall]

Monica admitted to trash talking Melinda to other wives, although she doesn’t remember what she said due to being intoxicated. Read it in the citizen a couple weeks ago. Take it for what you’d like.
New Karlsson court filings describe relationship of fear, accusations and gossip

 

[Cellee]

Monica admitted to trash talking Melinda to other wives, although she doesn’t remember what she said due to being intoxicated. Read it in the citizen a couple weeks ago. Take it for what you’d like.
New Karlsson court filings describe relationship of fear, accusations and gossip

"According to the document, “Caryk became jealous when she learned news of Karlsson’s engagement (to Erik Karlsson). She describes her feeling as ‘this just sucks for me.’”

Well that is the most egotistical thing I have ever heard. He got engaged to himself.

 

[Mr Fahrenheit]

Judge: Ok, to will prosecute Ms Caryk we will need to see your evidence so please hand over your computer so we can go through your internet history-

Karlsson: JUDGE WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE!

 

[Asheville]

A non-story until evidence surfaces. Just some catty women at this point.

 

[coupe89]

It is the new world we live in now guilty no matter what and then everyone jumps on the bandwagon with how they never liked the person.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Melinda would never lend her hand in the form of a protective order against Monika if she didn’t believe her guilty of the bullying

Do you know these people personally or are you just being creepy?

 

[The Assclown]

Do you know these people personally or are you just being creepy?

Why would anyone request a protective order if they felt it wasn’t necessary? How is that question creepy?

 

[Chairman Maouth]

8) Claims of Insider Information/ Rumors & Hearsay: If you're an insider, contact us with proof BEFORE you post. These posts will be allowed/rejected at the discretion of administrators after consulting with other posters, moderators, and relevant sources. Deference will be given to veteran members who have established credibility. It's not acceptable to post that you heard someone has a drinking/drug/sex/personal problem from a "good" source. Do not post information that can be considered defamatory without a link to a credible media source. Other forums, personal websites, amateur/unvetted blogs, hearsay, and personal testimonials are not considered credible.

 

[JT Kreider]

"According to the document, “Caryk became jealous when she learned news of Karlsson’s engagement (to Erik Karlsson). She describes her feeling as ‘this just sucks for me.’”

Huh? Why in the world be Caryk be jealous and why would it suck for her? I don't see how that would have any impact on her whatsoever...

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Why would anyone request a protective order if they felt it wasn’t necessary? How is that question creepy?

It's creepy because your whole post you give this impression of proximity to complete strangers with which you think you are on a first-name basis. Kinda like old ladies reading about "Brad and Angelina" in third rate magazines.

Also, do you know who says "X would never do that" ? Moms, when the principal calls to inform them their children have been caught smoking weed or something. Certainly not outsiders speaking about complete strangers. You don't know these people and you don't know what they would do or not. You don't know what motivates their actions either.

Nobody's reading your comment and going: "Well, that settles it! 'Melinda' made a legitimate request since that anonymous person called Assclown is vouching for her!"

 

[The Assclown]

It's creepy because your whole post you give this impression of proximity to complete strangers with which you think you are on a first-name basis. Kinda like old ladies reading about "Brad and Angelina" in third rate magazines.

Also, do you know who says "X would never do that" ? Moms, when the principal calls to inform them their children have been caught smoking weed or something. Certainly not outsiders speaking about complete strangers. You don't know these people and you don't know what they would do or not. You don't know what motivates their actions either.

Nobody's reading your comment and going: "Well, that settles it! 'Melinda' made a legitimate request since that anonymous person called Assclown is vouching for her!"

My apologies. If I said Karlsson or Caryk, or used their full first and last names, I suppose my post would be less creepy. How utterly foolish of me.

Further, I’m not sure what kind of world you live in but I don’t go around asking for protective orders against acquaintances.

I’m simply repeating what has happened in this situation. I’m not sure why this has rubbed you the wrong way.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Further, I’m not sure what kind of world you live in but I don’t go around asking for protective orders against acquaintances.

I live in the same world you do, the one where frivolous legal actions are undertaken all the time and where some people consider it is perfectly justified to dial 911 when your large pepperoni extra cheese isn't delivered quickly enough.

I'm sure you don't ask for protective orders for no reason. But you're now projecting that fact on complete strangers that you call by their first names and vouch for. I'm sure you don't stalk people and send them thousands of messages, including death wish on their children either. Does that automatically absolves Caryk?

What we do know based on the *limited information* we have is that there is a pretty high likelihood that at least one of those two women isn't acting entirely rationally. It's therefore completely pointless to use your personal logic here. Unless you have information we do not have access to?

 

[The Assclown]

I live in the same world you do, the one where frivolous legal actions are undertaken all the time and where some people consider it is perfectly justified to dial 911 when your large pepperoni extra cheese isn't delivered quickly enough.

I'm sure you don't ask for protective orders for no reason. But you're now projecting that fact on complete strangers that you call by their first names and vouch for. I'm sure you don't stalk people and send them thousands of messages, including death wish on their children either. Does that automatically absolves Caryk?

What we do know based on the *limited information* we have is that there is a pretty high likelihood that at least one of those two women isn't acting entirely rationally. It's therefore completely pointless to use your personal logic here. Unless you have information we do not have access to?

I’m not vouching for either party here and I made that clear in another post in this thread. You seem to be hanging on to the fact that I used their first names though, it’s really not that big of a deal. If I were writing professionally, it’d be weird. But this is an informal setting and I definitely do not know either of the parties involved.

Either way, I’ve been here for a long time and have enjoyed your posts since I joined HF back in 2002. Did not expect you to reply in this thread.

 

[shortfuze]

What if they both just turned their computers/mobiles in to the police for a thorough check? It would all solve itself really and prove guilt or innocence. Alternatively have their respective agents agree on a private investigator for the job.

After all this time I would think that they have probably done that already.