Sunday, May 23, 2021

Criteria for a Defamation Lawsuit

 From the blog "Alexandra Grant vs Parker: Framework for a Wrongful Conviction":



With her connection to Reeve and the PR articles published over the past two years, Alexandra Grant meets the legal criteria of a limited public figure.

Alexandra Grant claimed that lies were written about her by Parker but yet did not pursue a defamation lawsuit because she is required to prove 4 things and the first one itself, that the statements made about her are false. Most of what has been written is not false. Alexandra Grant did lie on her resume and in interviews and these things were written about her online by me and many other people.

A defamation lawsuit can also be countered with an anti-SLAPP motion. Grant chooses the restraining order route as it allows hearsay proving herself to be a lying sociopath who wasn't looking to stop someone from stalking or harassing her but from writing the truth about her which could ruin her scheme to make a living selling love products and to sell love products, she cannot be known as a liar, but she is a liar and this is her fault. If your art isn't at the permanent collection of the Art Gallery of Ontario, why lie about it? I can only conclude that Alexandra Grant is a sociopath who has no shame, no conscience, no moral or concept of what is right and wrong or decent and will lie, scam and commit perjury in court all to satisfy her fragile and delusional ego.

#alexandragrant #grantalexandra #conartist #narcissist #keanureeves #xartistsbooks #grantloveproject #cancelkeanureeves #cancelalexandragrant #cancelevil #marfainvitational #artreview #arts #artisticintegrity #artist #ochigallery #artcollector #artdealer #artcritic #artfair #charityfraud #contemporaryart #artmuseum





No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.