A.V. Club Most Read

News Newswire Great Job, Internet!
TV Club All Reviews What's On Tonight
Video All Video A.V. Undercover A.V. Undercover: The Day Of The Dead The Hi-Lo Food Show
Reviews All Reviews Film TV Music Books
Features All Features TV Club Great Job, Internet!
Sections Film Tv Music Food Comedy Books Games Aux
Our Company About Us Contact Advertise Privacy Policy Careers RSS
Onion Inc. Sites The Onion The A.V. Club ClickHole Onion Studios
Get The Latest

Courtney Love's second Twitter lawsuit probably headed to jury trial

It's tough to even feign surprise these days at any news about Courtney Love saying regrettable things. But here’s the latest in her saga of continued not-giving-a-shit: The lawsuit over Love’s tweets accusing lawyer Rhonda Holmes of being bribed may now be headed to a jury trial.

Call it an encore performance for the woman who pretty much invented the Twitter defamation suit. Even after coughing up $430,000 to designer Dawn Simorangkir last year for defamatory tweets, Love still found it necessary to tweet in 2010 that she was “fucking devastated when Rhonda J Holmes esq of San Diego was bought off,” and that she'd “been hiring and firing lawyers to help me with this.”

According to Love’s legal representative, Michael Niborski of Pryor Cashman, she didn’t really mean that when Love tweeted that the lawyer had disappeared, presumably because “they got to her”: Obviously, the phrase 'they got to her'... can mean many different things,” Niborski wrote in a demurrer. “For example, it more plausibly means ‘they irritated her’ or ‘they wore her down’ or ‘they reasoned with her.’ It does not necessarily mean ‘they bribed her into ceasing her legal representation of Courtney Love.’” He added, “Who are ‘they’? Who is 'her?’”

Yesterday, though, a Los Angeles judge issued a statement of disagreement (read: called bullshit), ruling that the tweet could be “reasonably interpreted by the average reader as a statement of fact.” [via Spin]

Submit your Newswire tips here.