Local

RedState editor, Daily Mail dismissed from Hill’s ‘revenge porn’ case

Judge Yolanda Orosco of the Los Angeles Superior Court dismissed RedState.com Editor-in-Chief Jennifer van Lahr as a defendant in Katie Hill’s proceedings related to the release of Hill’s intimate images on Thursday. This decision will be made the day after Orozco rejects the Daily Mail as a defendant.

Citing the First Amendment, Orosco said in a decision on the Daily Mail that the image released by the media was “a matter of public interest or public interest because he talked about Hill’s character and her qualifications.” I wrote. She was alleged to have had a sexual relationship and was portrayed with campaign staff who seemed to be displaying controversial tattoos because they used illegal drugs at the time and resembled a symbol of white supremacism. (Hill) A problem arose during her parliamentary campaign. ”

Hill responded to court decision twitter..

“I sued the Daily Mail for the release of non-consensual nude images,” Hill wrote Wednesday. “Today, we lost in court because judges, not juries, think revenge porn is free to speak. This fight is big for women who have ever wanted to run for public office. Leaving is not an option because it makes sense. ”

Hill continued to argue against Orosco’s ruling on Twitter Thursday morning, writing that “revenge pornography (illegal shared images) cannot be considered in the public interest under any circumstances.”

Attorneys representing Hill and her ex-husband Kenneth Hessrep announced in court Thursday that they had settled another proceeding. Both sides agreed with Hesrep’s request to remove the hearing on the order to curb domestic violence, and the court lifted Hill’s temporary restraint order against Hesrep.



RedState editor, Daily Mail dismissed from Hill’s ‘revenge porn’ case Source link RedState editor, Daily Mail dismissed from Hill’s ‘revenge porn’ case

Related Articles

Back to top button