Art begins the show by referencing his sudden departure from “Coast to Coast AM,” which caused significant concern among his listeners. He promises to reveal the reasons behind his departure within the week, hinting at a family crisis that led to his abrupt decision. To explain the situation, Art introduces his attorney, Gerald Fox, who will help outline the events that have transpired over the past year and a half, which have been like a nightmare for him.
Art mentions that new information has been made available on his website, encouraging listeners to check it out for more details. He briefly discusses the work of David John Oates, a former guest on his show known for his reverse speech analysis. Art recalls a particular incident with Oates involving the use of metaphorical reversals during a program, which led to disagreements and ultimately Oates’ exclusion from the show. Following this, Oates launched a series of attacks against Art on the internet and other radio programs.
Despite attempts to reconcile, the tension between Art and Oates continued, culminating in a point where Art decided to cease interactions with Oates altogether
David continued his attacks on Art, which strained their relationship. Art recalls an incident where a guest named Robert Stevens was tossed off the show, suggesting Stevens had an agenda from the start. Art introduces his attorney, Jerry Fox, to explain a tragedy in Art’s family that led to fallout affecting his career. Fox elaborates on a defamation incident where David Hinkson and Ted Gunderson falsely accused Art of being indicted for child molestation and bribery during a shortwave radio broadcast.
Fox, having practiced law for 14 years, emphasizes the severity of such defamatory accusations, especially those involving child molestation, which are incredibly damaging. The retraction from Hinkson and Gunderson was unsatisfactory and lacked accountability. An investigation confirmed the falsehood of their statements. Fox questions why these individuals would make such baseless and harmful accusations, noting that the radio host could have prevented the discussion but chose to continue it.
Art and Jerry continue discussing the shocking and irresponsible behavior of Ted Gunderson, who, along with David Hinkson, made defamatory statements about Art on a radio broadcast. These statements falsely accused Art of being indicted for child molestation and bribery. Jerry emphasizes how the host, instead of stopping the defamatory conversation, seemed to instigate it further. The transcripts of this broadcast are publicly available as part of the lawsuit filed in Nashville, Davidson County, showing the egregious nature of the accusations.
Art recalls his visit to Nashville for depositions related to this case, revealing the extent of the defamation. Jerry highlights that this was not a simple mistake but a series of harmful statements designed to tarnish Art’s reputation. The defamatory remarks led to a barrage of calls to Art, showing the immediate negative impact. Jerry reiterates that their goal is to hold the defamers accountable in court, emphasizing the courage and commitment required to pursue such a case, especially given Art’s status as a public figure.
Jerry explains the legal nuances for public figures, noting that they must endure more scrutiny and criticism than private individuals. While opinions are protected under free speech, defamatory statements that harm one’s reputation are not. The balance between free speech and the right to privacy is crucial, and defamation laws aim to protect individuals from baseless character assassination.
Jerry explains that as a public figure, Art must prove actual malice and intent to injure in defamation cases. The lawsuit aims to hold Hinkson, Gunderson, and the radio station accountable for broadcasting false and scandalous information. Jerry highlights the responsibility of radio stations to exercise due care in their broadcasts, criticizing the station’s lack of standards, including broadcasting in languages they didn’t understand.
The station allowed a guest to speak in German, spreading racist and militant remarks without any oversight, exemplifying their negligence. Jerry suggests that the station is part of a broader network disseminating hateful information, often referred to as “hate radio,” which can have far-reaching and damaging effects. He draws parallels between this type of content and societal issues, such as violence in schools.
Art wonders if he’ll ever understand why these defamatory statements were made against him. Jerry expresses hope that the trial and discovery process will shed light on the motivations behind the malicious actions, allowing Art to gain some understanding and closure.
Jerry and Art discuss the importance and limits of free speech, emphasizing its status as a fundamental right in the U.S. They acknowledge that while free speech allows individuals to express their opinions freely, it does not protect false and defamatory statements. Jerry explains that there is no prior restraint in the U.S., meaning that actions against defamatory statements can only be taken after they are made, not before.
They delve into the concept of accountability, noting that newspapers, radio stations, and television stations can be held liable in court for publishing false and malicious content. The conversation then shifts to the internet, where anonymity allows individuals to post anything they want without immediate repercussions. Jerry cites the Blumenthal vs. Drudge case, highlighting the lack of gatekeepers on the internet and the virtual immunity granted to internet service providers. This immunity fosters free speech but also presents challenges in regulating defamatory content.
The positive aspect of the internet, according to Jerry, is that it democratizes communication, allowing anyone with access to a computer to reach a global audience with minimal investment.
Art and Jerry discuss the positive and negative aspects of the internet, particularly the ease with which individuals can spread information, both true and false. Jerry compares the internet to a freeway without traffic laws, where individuals can act recklessly without immediate consequences. This lack of gatekeepers leads to a sense of impunity, allowing people to post defamatory content anonymously.
Jerry explains that more sophisticated users can disguise their identities, making it difficult to hold them accountable. This sets up the discussion for the next part of the story. Art’s lawsuit in Nashville is just the beginning; more incidents follow. Jerry outlines a new lawsuit filed in Los Angeles Superior Court against David John Oates and Robert Stevens. On April 3, 1999, during a radio program, Stevens falsely accused Art of being involved in pornography production and distribution, claiming a consortium of private investigators had confirmed the story.
Jerry emphasizes that these accusations are entirely false. Independent investigations and records from the Monterey County Clerk’s Office confirm there are no such records. The defamatory statements were further spread on the internet by Stevens, who created a website to propagate these falsehoods. The documents even contradict themselves, admitting they could not find any arrest records for Art but suggesting such records might have been expunged.
Art and Jerry discuss how the false accusations against Art, including child molestation and pornography, were widely disseminated on the internet, causing significant harm. These accusations were thoroughly investigated and proven false, with official records showing no such offenses. Despite this, the defamatory statements continued to spread, subjecting Art and his former colleagues to relentless scrutiny and distress.
Jerry describes the lawsuit filed in Los Angeles, which specifically addresses the misuse of the internet to spread these harmful lies. The lawsuit contains six counts, including slander, conspiracy to commit slander, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Slander involves making false statements with the intent to injure someone’s reputation, and “slander per se” refers to particularly egregious defamatory statements, such as accusations of criminal activity.
Art and Jerry emphasize that the lawsuit aims to hold the perpetrators accountable for their malicious actions, which were designed to cause maximum harm. They highlight the repetitive nature of the defamatory statements, suggesting a deliberate attempt to inflict severe emotional distress on Art and his family. Art mentions that even his webmaster, Keith Rowland, was falsely accused of child molestation by the same parties, demonstrating the extent of the malicious campaign against them.
Jerry continues to explain the gravity of the situation, highlighting how the intentional infliction of emotional distress was aimed at harassing and humiliating Art. The lawsuit also includes counts for tortious interference with contract, as the defamatory actions have significantly disrupted Art’s ability to entertain and engage with his audience. These disruptions have forced Art to spend much of his time defending himself rather than focusing on his work.
The lawsuit alleges a conspiracy between David John Oates and Robert Stevens, suggesting that other unnamed parties (referred to as “Doe defendants”) are also involved. Art describes the extensive evidence collected, including volumes of emails and letters from people questioning the truth of the allegations. Jerry underscores the personal impact of such false accusations, likening it to a neighbor spreading malicious lies that disrupt one’s life.
Jerry compares the situation to the scene in “The Wizard of Oz” where the wizard is revealed as a mere man behind a curtain. The lawsuit aims to expose those hiding behind the anonymity of the internet. There is a broader debate about regulating the internet to balance free speech with accountability. Jerry suggests that, like other media, the internet should have some form of regulation to prevent irresponsible and harmful actions.
Art and Jerry discuss the challenges faced by average individuals dealing with internet defamation. Jerry acknowledges that while Art can afford legal action, many people cannot, leaving them without recourse. He highlights the need for accountability rather than censorship on the internet. Jerry envisions a future where internet users might require a license, similar to a driver’s license, to ensure responsible behavior online.
Art and Jerry agree that teaching children to tell the truth is essential, yet the internet often provides examples of the opposite. They note that the defamatory statements against Art have not ceased and are likely to continue until legal actions force the perpetrators to face accountability in court. Art emphasizes the severe impact these lies have had on his life, making it nearly unlivable at times.
Jerry advises listeners to piece together the information from the lawsuits in Nashville and Los Angeles to understand the full scope of the defamation campaign against Art.
Art expresses his desire for answers and decides to take calls from the audience. A caller from Houston comments on how sickening it is that people go to such lengths to harm others, but emphasizes the positive aspect of the U.S. legal system where real people can decide on these issues. The caller assures Art that many listeners do not believe the accusations and express their support.
Art acknowledges that being in the public eye makes him a target for attacks, but the nature of the accusations against him goes beyond normal scrutiny. He mentions the ongoing pattern of defamatory statements that have plagued him for years, highlighting the organized nature of these attacks. Jerry agrees, noting that they are close to uncovering the full extent of the conspiracy behind the defamation.
Another caller from Orlando suggests that the radio station involved in broadcasting the defamatory remarks might be controlled by an evil entity, hinting at a deeper conspiracy. Jerry points out the irony that the station bills itself as a Christian network, yet allows harmful content to be aired. They discuss how the station sells airtime to individuals like Gunderson, whose show strayed far from Christian values.
A caller named Pat from Toledo shares his own experience of being harassed online, which led to losing his job, illustrating the real-life consequences of internet defamation. Another caller asks Art how he maintains his sanity through all this, to which Art admits that it has been challenging. There are nights when he struggles to come on air due to the overwhelming stress caused by these false accusations.
Art acknowledges the ongoing nightmare caused by the defamatory statements, which includes physical threats. Jerry reassures the audience that Art has the resources to secure necessary protection, but underscores that most people do not have such means. He shares an example of a client whose website was hacked, illustrating the broader issue of cyberstalking and the need for more robust protections.
Art asks what an average person can do under such circumstances, to which Jerry points out the current legislative efforts to address internet-related issues. He emphasizes the importance of accountability and protection for the average individual. They encourage anyone with relevant information about the cases to contact Jerry’s law firm, seeking to uncover the reasons behind the malicious campaign against Art.
Jerry provides the law firm’s contact information, urging those with substantive information to come forward. They discuss the expected duration of the legal process, noting that while cases can move relatively quickly, they are prepared for a prolonged battle. Jerry stresses that their focus is on addressing the wrongful conduct rather than harboring animosity towards the individuals involved.
Art and Jerry continue taking calls from listeners, many of whom express support and sympathy for Art’s situation. A caller from Mobile, Alabama, shares his disdain for the defamatory actions against Art and emphasizes his trust and support for him. Art acknowledges the bombardment of false accusations he has faced both on-air and off-air, highlighting the negative impact it has had on his life and ability to perform his job.
Jerry reiterates the importance of the legal battle to clear Art’s name and hold the perpetrators accountable. Art discusses the immense stress caused by living under the shadow of false accusations, particularly those involving child molestation, which he considers the worst possible defamation. He also addresses the impact on his webmaster, Keith, who has been unjustly targeted as well.
Another caller from Reno, Nevada, comments on the poorly worded and ludicrous claims made on the websites of David Oates and Robert Stevens, expressing full support for Art. The caller asks about Keith’s well-being, and Art explains the difficulty Keith faces dealing with such severe and baseless accusations. Despite the support from listeners, Art hints at more distressing news yet to be revealed due to ongoing legal processes.
A final caller expresses confidence in Art’s eventual victory but raises concerns about potential legal precedents that could affect internet regulation and free speech. Art assures listeners that the focus remains on seeking justice and accountability for the defamatory actions taken against him.
A caller expresses concerns about regulation and the potential impact on free speech, fearing that increased government control could lead to censorship. Art and Jerry acknowledge these concerns, emphasizing the difference between accountability and restraint. They advocate for accountability, where individuals must take responsibility for their actions and statements without infringing on free speech.
Another caller from Reno expresses support for Art, criticizing the defamatory claims as poorly worded and ignorant. They inquire about Keith, Art’s webmaster, who has also been targeted. Art explains that Keith is holding up but is deeply affected by the false accusations. Jerry adds that others have also suffered from the actions of the same individuals, with some providing signed affidavits detailing their experiences.
Art and Jerry reiterate the importance of the legal battle to seek justice and accountability. They encourage anyone with relevant information to contact Jerry’s law firm, providing the correct contact details for Davidson Patties, who is leading the investigation. They stress that this effort is not just about Art but about protecting others from similar harm.
A caller from Springfield, Massachusetts, wonders why David Oates would betray Art, given that Art helped make him famous. Jerry explains the lasting damage of defamation, noting that even after clearing one’s name, some doubt often lingers. This residual doubt is a significant part of the harm caused by defamation.
Another caller from Southern California, Marianne, shares her experience of being harassed via email by her ex-husband, who is threatening to send false pornographic images of her to her family and friends. She asks Jerry about the difference between defamation of character and libel. Jerry explains that defamation is a broad term that includes both libel (written defamation) and slander (spoken defamation). He advises Marianne to seek a restraining order and legal counsel, as there are laws against cyberstalking and extortion.
Art and Jerry continue to provide the law firm’s contact information for anyone with relevant information about the ongoing cases. They reiterate the importance of accountability and the challenges faced by individuals dealing with online defamation and harassment.
A caller from Nashville, Tennessee, discusses how accusations of child molestation are used to dehumanize and destroy reputations, referencing historical and contemporary examples. Art agrees, noting how such claims leave lasting damage, even if disproven. Jerry explains that defamation’s lingering doubt is why these lawsuits are essential to clear Art’s name fully.
Another caller from Tempe, Arizona, asks for assurance that the lawsuit is legitimate. Both Art and Jerry affirm its authenticity, with Jerry emphasizing the serious nature of the claims and the professional integrity of their law firm. They address the concern that some might see the lawsuit as a publicity stunt, underscoring its gravity.
The caller also inquires about David Oates’ citizenship and whether he could be deported if found liable. Jerry clarifies that their focus is on holding Oates accountable for his false statements, not on his citizenship status or deportation.
A subsequent caller comments on how the internet has become a dangerous tool for spreading harmful content, reflecting on how society struggles to handle this powerful technology responsibly. Art and Jerry acknowledge the severe impact the internet can have on people’s lives when misused.
Art and Jerry discuss the positive aspects of the internet while acknowledging the need for responsible use and accountability. Jerry emphasizes that if people do not act responsibly, they invite government regulation, which they both wish to avoid. They stress the importance of truthfulness and accountability without destroying the valuable medium of the internet.
Jerry reiterates the fundamental defense in a defamation case is the truth, and he and Art are confident in their position. Art thanks Jerry for his support and reminds listeners to contact Davidson Patties if they have any relevant information regarding the cases. He signs off, reiterating the importance of accountability and the gravity of the situation.