If you have a website, please copy this code and past in your website.

<a href="http://boycottlocal6.com/" target="_blank"><img border="0" src="http://boycottlocal6.com/yabb/Templates/Forum/default/yabblogo.png" width="200" height="100" alt="Click Here to BOYCOTT LOCAL 6"></a>

This is how the logo will look
 

Listen to Doug Guetzloe on Talk Radio WAMT 1190 http://wamt1190.com from 11am-12pm for a response to the recent court ruling.

Tony Pipitone and WKMG Local 6 are being sued by Doug Guetzloe for Invasion of Privacy for airing personal files illegally obtained from his personal files storage unit.

The Bill of Rights protects citizens against unreasonable search and seizure. But that is a protection from government intrusion — not media corporations, or individual journalists.

Follow the progress of the case here: 2007-CA-000914-O

NEWS RELEASE - 03/19/2008 08:47 AM

For Immediate Release
For Further Information
Contact: Attorney Fred O'Neal 407-719-6796

JUDGE DENIES LOCAL 6/SHURGARD MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - RULES FOR GUETZLOE IN BATTLE OVER STOLEN FILES

Orange-Osceola Circuit Judge Reginald Whitehead has issued an order denying the motions by WKMG/Local 6 and Shurgard Storage that sought a Final Summary Judgment in the stolen files litigation brought by public relations consultant Doug Guetzloe.

This order against Local 6 and Shurgard follows a similar order issued by Judge Whitehead denying motions by both corporations to dismiss the lawsuit brought by Guetzloe that seeks the return of the files.

The hotly contested lawsuit now moves into a final discovery phase in that the individuals involved in the theft of the files will be deposed.

The court has ruled that, if proven, Guetzloe's claims would amount to "conversion" by Shurgard and Local 6, the legal term for theft.

All the evidence submitted thus far has shown conclusively that Shurgard and Local 6 has lied about circumstances about how Local 6 obtained the documents and that Shurgard failed to follow state law in notifying Guetzloe of the impending sale of his private documents.

"We're pleased about this latest ruling and look forward to proving in court that these documents were stolen. This two year battle over my private medical records and other documents has been a nightmare and I look forward to the successful conclusion of this lawsuit," Guetzloe stated.

Attorney Fred O'Neal is representing Guetzloe in this case (Case # 2007-CA-914).
 

5/3/2007 ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT; GRANTED AS TO COUNT I WITHOUT ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT; GRANTED AS TO COUNT I WITHOUT PREJUDICE; DENIED IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS PREJUDICE; DENIED IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS

DOWNLOAD APPELLEE'S ANSWER BRIEF

BOYCOTT LOCAL 6 - Take Action Today!

Please send a message to those that do business with Local 6 that you will not be doing business with any business that does business with Local 6.

It's time to strike a blow against the liberal media and this is a great way to do it.

Local 6 is owned by the Washington Post and is a liberal bastion of negative nasty news reports that includes the reports on the stolen property of Doug Guetzloe.

Send a strong message - Boycott Local 6!

You can send your message by clicking on this LINK and your message will automatically be sent to their advertisers:

Or you can write; call or fax your message that you will BOYCOTT LOCAL 6!

SEE A FULL LIST OF WKMG ADVERTISERS HERE

Email Local 6 and let them know your thoughts on these baseless attacks:

lrowe@local6.com
tpipitone@local6.com
sforbes@wkmg.com
hmaldonado@wkmg.com

------------------------------------------------

A two-step process determines whether the press is liable for invasion of a person's privacy:

First, has the tort been committed -- that is, has the newsgathering or publishing process violated certain legal principles which protect the individual?

Second, even if there is a technical invasion of privacy, is the press "privileged" under the First Amendment? Just as in libel cases, there may be a sort of "constitutional excuse" granting immunity for some articles or broadcasts which otherwise might lead to damage awards.

It is possible to define four different, though overlapping, forms of invasion of privacy:

1. intrusion upon a person's seclusion or solitude;

2. appropriation of a person's name or likeness;

3. public disclosures of embarrassing private facts; and

4. publicity which places a person in a false light.

..more

Many suits against the media now claim invasion of privacy, not libel. Jurors have strong feelings in this area. So do judges. Privacy cases focus on personal, emotional beliefs in conflict with each other.