Independent Anti-Corruption Bloggers, Citizen Journalists and Whistleblowers Face Extreme Prejudice and Retaliation in the Court System, as they are exposing Judges and Attorneys. Thus making fair and impartial rulings nearly impossible nationwide.

Anti-Corruption Blogger Crystal Cox Makes a Stand Against Overreaching Judges.

Defendant Crystal Cox files a Motion to Rehear, Redact, accusations by a Ninth Circuit Appellate Court of her alleged criminal activity. And thereby CALLS OUT a very important issue, in which most anti-corruption bloggers, citizen journalists and whistle blowers face in our court system nationwide.

"I, Defendant Crystal Cox have fought against fraud and corruption for nearly a decade. I have fought against great odds to hold on to this appeal. I am proud of this victory for all Citizen Journalists, Whistle Blower, and Anti-Corruption Bloggers. I am thankful to Mayer Brown and Eugene Volokh for defending the case I made, the First Amendment case I preserved and fought for.

However, I cannot stand by and let the lie continue to replace the truth, as this affects not only all other Citizen Journalists, Whistle Blower, and Anti-Corruption Bloggers exposing corruption, but it also affects the credibility of the corruption I am reporting on and the victims of that corruption.

I am proud of this Ninth Circuit ruling, however, not at the expense of a lie, and the discrediting of what the anti-corruption bloggers are reporting on that really does expose corruption within in our judicial system on ever level.

I am not willing to let the lie stand as the Truth, and have the public at large believe that bloggers such as I am, exposing corrupt judges, senators, attorneys, law firms, disciplary committees, commissions and other important issues of the day, be seen as extortionists, blackmailers or painted out to be the "bad guy".

Defendant Crystal Cox is not simply a "blogger", Crystal Cox is an Anti-Corruption blogger and faces extreme retaliation and prejudice in the courts for exposing court corruption.

The issues at play here are not just about giving bloggers equal rights as journalists, but also equal credibility, as bloggers who expose corruption and are telling / reporting the stories that no other media outlet will Report on. These bloggers (whistleblowers, citizen journalists) are crucial to a true free society. And to the TRUE liberty and justice for all, as a matter of law and constitutional rights. These bloggers desperately need equal rights in a court of law, so that true justice and real journalism will prevail. 

Judges and attorneys are abusing our court process.

It is crucial to protect the voice of bloggers who are exposing those judges and attorneys and are therefore targeted by these judges, other judges, and gangs of attorneys painting the blogger out to be a criminal, a "bad guy" and thereby discrediting the very corruption regarding attorneys and judges that the anti-corruption bloggers are reporting on, exposing.

Mainstream media such as CNBC, Forbes, the New York Times, Reuters are not reporting on the corruption in our courts, our judicial process.

Bloggers are, and need protected from the overreaching judges who paint them out to be the problem, when in actuality the bloggers are really exposing the problem.

It is, indeed, important to have equal rights in a court of law, as an anti-corruption blogger, however the First Amendment equality is not the only issue. The shield law should also protect these front runners in exposing corruption. And the other issue, as show by this very ruling, is that the "word" of the blogger should have equal credibility in the eyes of the courts, as a matter of law.

I am not saying either report on or post fact, let the news consumer decide who they want to "believe". However, a court of law should not, as a matter of law, and constitutional rights use a New York Times article to convict an anti-corruption blogger, a citizen journalist, a whistle blower of a crime.

Those reporting on corruption in our courts do not have a voice other than blogs. 

It is imperative in our times that Citizen Journalists, Investigative Bloggers, AntiCorruption Bloggers and Whistleblowers have equal rights to those in traditional media. Otherwise corruption and greed that violates human rights, will continue to be rampant, and the lives of the victims of corruption will continue to suffer in every way.

This Ninth Circuit Ruling, levels the playing field for those reporting on corruption in their town, their expertise, their personal research, and experience. 

Now they have equal rights to protection under the law. This means that Traditional Journalists and Big Media can no longer have a Super Power to distort the news, post fake facts simply to support ad dollars, politicians and corporations, as a matter of law.

Yet this very ruling makes the word of a New York Times Journalist, a fact of LAW and evidence in a higher court ruling against that same blogger that just won equality.

This ruling contradicts itself by using the New York Times and David Carr as a legal precedent and authority to "convict" blogger Crystal Cox of behavior and crimes she is NOT guilty of. Thereby opening the door for all traditional media, institutional press to easily discredit and shut down anti-corruption bloggers, by reporting the LIE and having courts such as this use those lies as factual evidence to discredit, defame, slander and humiliate the blogger exposing corruption and trying to do the right thing.

Oftentimes when bloggers expose corruption, those bloggers are stripped of their rights within the very judicial system they are reporting corruption on. 

This WIN ends this, at least, in theory, and in a higher court judicial ruling. The public at large will decide what they want to believe and from whom. However, now bloggers reporting on the story ALL have an equal say, as a matter of LAW and Constitutional Rights.

Yet, this ruling also gives the institutional press the power to "MAKE LAW", to "Convict" who they don't like or want in their "camp" and that is unlawful and unconstitutional.

This Ninth Circuit Win ends the Monopoly of Free Speech Big Media has unconstitutionally held for so long, as a matter of LAW. However, at the same time it enables And speaks to the matter that courts value the New York Times reports, articles, opinions, lies and slander as facts and evidence in a court of law over the word of the "blogger", who now has those equal rights.

by Defendant Crystal L. Cox"


Source of Crystal Cox's Statement in Favor of Motion to Rehear, to Redact Extortion Allegations
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Sfa6KPy3ur6pBOcUF64CfvRFKM-n0ASMWhpUPC4G43Q/edit

To View UCLA Constitutional Law Professor, Lawyer Eugene Volokh's Motion to Rehear Click Below
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bzn2NurXrSkib1NraEFFb1Rac2M/edit