Hogan On Gawker: They Are 'Flagrantly' Violating A Court Order

Chris CrumLife

Share this Post

Hulk Hogan and his lawyers filed a motion to hold Gawker in contempt of court for disobeying a court order to remove an article about the infamous Hulk Hogan sex tape. Again, that's the article, not just the video.

The filing alleges that Gawker is "flagrantly" violating the court order, which Gawker has appealed.

In a post called, "A Judge Told Us to Take Down Our Hulk Hogan Sex Tape Post. We Won't," Gawker's John Cook wrote:

It requires us to remove the video as well as "the written narrative describing activities occurring during he private sexual encounter, including: (a) all descriptions of visual images and sounds captured on the Sex Tape or any other video of this private sexual encounter, and (b) all direct quotations of words spoken during this private sexual encounter and recorded on the Sex Tape or any other video of this private sexual encounter." Campbell, who represented the parents of Terri Schiavo in their effort to portray their daughter as conscious and alert and was appointed to the bench by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, described her order as serving "the public interest." She stated very clearly during the hearing that she had never watched, and did not intend to watch, the video that she was ordering us to remove: "I'm not going to look at the tape. I don't think at this point in time I need to look at the tape."

We publish all manner of stories here. Some are serious, some are frivolous, some are dumb. I am not going to make a case that the future of the Republic rises or falls on the ability of the general public to watch a video of Hulk Hogan fucking his friend's ex-wife. But the Constitution does unambiguously accord us the right to publish true things about public figures. And Campbell's order requiring us to take down not only a very brief, highly edited video excerpt from a 30-minute Hulk Hogan fucking session but also a lengthy written account from someone who had watched the entirety of that fucking session, is risible and contemptuous of centuries of First Amendment jurisprudence.

Here, you can see the latest filing in its entirety:

Plaintiff's Motion for OSC Re. Contempt - Signed (00011437)[1] by Eriq Gardner

Where this goes from here is anybody's guess.

Image: Gremlins Wiki

Chris Crum
Chris Crum has been a part of the WebProNews team and the iEntry Network of B2B Publications since 2003. Follow Chris on Twitter, on StumbleUpon, on Pinterest and/or on Google: +Chris Crum.