I noticed this in the Brown v Sperling decision today.
 Some of those posts are distressing and are made knowing that their content would distress. [snip] In addition comments had been made of a derogatory nature regarding Ms Flannagan’s religious beliefs and her competence as a law practitioner which have no substance and are clearly designed to hurt. I am satisfied that the comments were made in such circumstances that the contents of them were clearly offensive.
Recall Sperling’s response the that same ruling?
Simon Buckingham and Madeleine Flannagan should hand in their LLBs and go back to Law school. This kind of abusive and vexatious litigation is not what our courts are for.
With Jackie Sperling, irony comes standard.
Oh, speaking of which:
If someone had accused me of murdering a family member – and i was innocent – nothing would keep me off that stand or from telling the world – and the court – the truth.
Funny what slips out, isn’t it?
This post is about Jacqueline (Jackie) Sperling, and is part of an ongoing series discussing her ongoing campaign of harassment and lies against lawyer Madeleine Flannagan and Ms Brown, and The Narrative - the alternate reality she presents on her blog in which she pretends to be the victim of her targets. You can read a court decision that outlines her campaign and the court’s assessment of The Narrative here.
Please do not place abusive comments on her blog, phone her, or approach her or her family as she will blame this on her victims.