Comments from another victim or Rosemary's dated April, 26, 2012
Laurie Flori from Carlinville
was “one” of Rosemary Thornton’s victims. Laurie and I spoke on the phone about
her experience. I sent her a draft of this copy for her review since she is
limited to talking publicly about ONLY the facts involved in the court case
with Thornton.
Flori’s attorney requested information about Thornton’s
other Cease and Desist letters.
Identify every
occasion and the circumstances surrounding the event (i.e., time, parties
involved, content of communications)
since 2003, where Thornton contacted a party and claimed the party either
failed to cite or attribute to
her as a source and/or plagiarized her Sears materials.
ANSWER: Thornton
objects to this request to the extent it encompasses attorney-client
communications as protected by the
attorney-client privilege. Subject to and without waiving said objection, other
than Flori, Thornton has
sent out about five or six Cease and Desist notices (informally without
retaining an attorney), primarily
to websites and newspapers about correcting the problem (meaning to provide proper attribution or
remove the unauthorized copied text). Thornton has not kept any records of
these instances because in
each instance, the other party agreed to comply and an immediate correction of the problem was
made. Furthermore, any information Thornton would have had responsive to this request was destroyed
in either late 2004 or early 2005 (when Thornton had two hard drives fail).
Flori is the only party that
has failed to comply with the Cease and Desist request by Thornton. Thornton does believe, however,
that William and Mary College may have used information she compiled in the preparation of
materials for a Virginia municipality through a bid process, as set forth in
more detail in the e-mails produced
as attachments to the Response to Flori’s request for Production.
Laurie was the only one sent a Cease and Desist letter that
had the wherewithal to stop Thornton.
~~~~~
Laurie has boxes of information collected by herself and her
attorneys regarding Thornton’s unwarranted
attack.
Laurie’s book was published in September of 2005. Laurie
proceeded to promote her book and was asked to speak & hold book signings
around central Illinois. Then Laurie received a call from the Oprah Winfrey
show regarding their 20 year anniversary – the show was looking for people who
had taken 20 years to do something and finally accomplished it. It had taken
Laurie 20 years to write her book even though she had begun her Sears Homes
adventure in 1986 with her first tour of her Roseberry Model Sears Home.
Apparently this was enough to set Rosemary off and she launched an attack
accusing Laurie of plagiarism. The attack included a letter writing (email)
campaign to literary groups, libraries, congressmen and postings on the
internet; along with any other contact she could make. There were 70 emails
sent out by Thornton. Then Thornton, under the name of Rosemary Fuller – who
worked for Rosemary Thornton, contacted 7 places where Laurie was scheduled to
speak and had her canceled, claiming that Laurie had plagiarized her book and
that Thornton was filing suit against her. Thornton then sent Laurie a Cease and
Desist letter – telling Laurie that she could not sell her book in its present
form unless she gave credit to Thornton for information in the book. Thornton
sent the Cease and Desist letter to the Harpo Productions Legal Department of
the Oprah Winfrey show. Thornton continued her attack on Laurie in the letter
to Harpo claiming that she (Laurie) had plagiarized her and that she (Rosemary)
should appear rather than Laurie… The result was neither of them appeared.
Laurie secured a large legal firm to respond to the Cease and
Desist letter and file suit against Thornton for Defamation of Character the
very next week. Thornton evaded the process server for as long as she could,
knowing that the lawsuit could not begin until she had been served. A couple of
months later, Thornton was served, she couldn’t hide forever.
~~~~~
According to the following document, Thornton tried to blame
the attorney who wrote her Cease and Desist letter.
Thornton argues that
Thornton's counsel made the defamatory statement, not Thornton. The Amended Complaint
alleges that Thornton made the statements through counsel to Harpo
Publications. Further, Thornton allegedly adopted the statements by sending her
counsel's January 4, 2006, letter to the Wood River and Hillsboro libraries.
That is sufficient at the motion to dismiss stage. Thornton argues that the statements
are privileged statements made by counsel in anticipation of litigation. This
privilege applies to communications between the disputing parties and their
counsel, but does not extend to statements made to third parties. Golden v.
Mullen, 295 Ill.App.3d 865, 872, 693 N.E.2d 385, 390-91 (1997). Thus, the
privilege does not extend to statements made to representatives of Harpo
Productions, the Wood River public library, the Carlinville public library, and
the Hillsboro public library. Thornton also argues that her statements were
matters of opinion because she wrote in her letters to the Wood River and Hillsboro
libraries that "we believe" Additionally Speaking contains
plagiarism. Including a prefatory phrase like "we believe" or
"in my opinion" will not transform a factual assertion into an
opinion for llinois defamation law. Republic Tobacco Co. v. North Atlantic Trading
Co., Inc., 381 F.3d 717, 727
(7th Cir. 2004)
(applying Illinois law). Thornton allegedly asserted that Flori plagiarized her
book. The phrase "we believe" does not change that assertion into an
opinion.
After claiming that Laurie was a nobody, Thornton then tried
to say that Laurie was a public figure and therefore had to allow comments or
prove malicious intent. Thornton tried to get the case dismissed but the judge
ruled there was enough evidence to go to court.
Thornton also argues
that Flori is a public figure and so must prove malice. This is a factual issue
that is not a proper basis for a motion to dismiss. Thornton last argues that
Flori must plead with greater specificity. The allegations in the First Amended
Complaint are sufficient for federal notice pleading standards. Fed. R. Civ. P.
8(a). Flori states a claim.
~~~~~
Thornton’s hard drive, email & other documentation was
subpoenaed. Once again, Rosemary evaded the court orders for as long as she
could but eventually was ordered by the Federal Court Judge to surrender her
materials…..
This process took nearly two years.
Through her attorney, Thornton sought a settlement which was
proposed to Laurie’s attorney. Laurie thought
about this for weeks because she (Laurie) wanted her day in court. That day
would never come. Since no monetary penalty could be imposed on Thornton, as
she had no money, Laurie’s attorney decided that it was best to settle out of
court. The judge issued a restraining order that Thornton could not be within
500 feet of Laurie.
Thornton’s defense, such as it was, included a claim that
Laurie was interfering with her business and that she has willfully infringed
upon her copyright.
Thornton also requested a change of venue closer to her home
(Alton, Illinois at the time) because it was a hardship to go to the Federal
Court in Springfield, IL.
~~~~~
In the alternative,
Thornton asks the Court to transfer venue to the Southern District. Venue is
proper, inter alia, where a substantial part of the alleged tortious acts
occurred. 28 U.S.C. § 1391. Thornton allegedly defamed Flori in both
Carlinville and Hillsboro, Illinois. Both of these cities are in this District.
Venue is proper in this District. It is true that the venue chosen by the party
alleging infringement in an infringement action should generally be preferred
over the venue chosen by the alleged infringer for a declaratory judgment
action. E.g., Successories, Inc., 990 F.Supp. at 1047. Thornton, however, has
not filed an infringement action. Thus, these cases do not apply. Venue will
remain in this Court.
THEREFORE, Defendants'
Motion to Dismiss, Motion to Strike, and/or in the Alternative, Transfer Venue to
the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois (d/e 11)
is DENIED. The Defendants are directed to answer the First Amended Complaint by
July 10, 2006.
~~~~~
In an interview from a local paper in Illinois, Laurie told
the reporter “I didn’t get everything I asked for, but at least in the
agreement I signed Monday, I did get a retraction and an apology from Rosemary Thornton.”
The following is a summary of the newspaper article.
Flori filed a lawsuit
in U.S. District Court in Springfield in February 2006, asking in her complaint
for a declaratory judgment of non-infringement of copyright and defamation
against Thornton. Thornton had sent a
“cease-and-desist” letter to Flori in 2005, telling her to stop selling her
(Flori’s) book about Sears-built homes. Thornton’s letter accused Flori of
willful copyright infringement and plagiarism.
Thornton also sent correspondence to agencies such as libraries and to
The Oprah Winfrey Show thatwere interested in booking Flori for presentations and
talks about Sears-built homes, asserting that Flori had plagiarized Thornton’s
books on the subject.
The settlement
agreement shows that Thornton signed her letter of retraction on May 11, which
states: I, Rosemary Thornton, hereby acknowledge I have published statements to
third parties asserting Laurie Flori’s book, ‘Additionally Speaking,’ infringed
my copyright and plagiarized passages in my book, ‘The Houses That Sears
Built.’ I was mistaken in my assertions. I now retract all allegations in their
entirety and apologize. I no longer contest Flori’s contention that she arrived
at her statements and writings independently of my published works.
Thornton, formerly of
Alton, and Flori both became interested in the history of Sears catalog homes and
wrote books on the subject. Thornton’s book on Sears catalog homes, The Houses
That Sears Built; Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Sears Homes, was published
in 2002.
Flori became
interested in Sears catalog homes after she and her husband purchased their
current residence — a Sears catalog home — in 1983. They began conducting tours
of her home and the other remaining 152 Sears catalog homes in the Standard
Addition in Carlinville.
Standard Addition
contains the largest collection of Sears catalog homes in the world. Flori’s book, “Additionally Speaking,” was
published in 2005 and covers the history of Standard Oil Co. as it relates to
the Carlinville area.
Standard Oil, when it
built its oil refinery in Wood River, bought property in the Carlinville area
and mined coal to fuel the refinery. The oil company bought and constructed 192
Sears catalog homes to house the miners and their families.
Thornton, according to
court documents, now resides in Norfolk, Va. Her attorney, John Pawloski of St. Louis, did
not return telephone messages Tuesday.
James Fahey of
Sorling, Northrup, Hanna, Cullen and Cochran, of Springfield, Ill., served as
Flori’s attorney.
Flori said she had
taken a couple of weeks to review the proposed settlement before she signed it Monday.
“The grief this has
caused me and my family after all the detailed research I did for my book, and
was able to provide the court, I was not sure I didn’t want to continue to
trial,” Flori said. “However, her retraction and apology is a matter of record
now, and I hope I can get just get back to doing what I love — giving presentations, tour and talks on
Sears catalog homes.”
All information and documents, including the information
cited in this blog entry, about the Flori V Thornton case can be found at this
website http://www.plainsite.org/flashlight/case.html?id=193109 .
Thornton hasn’t exactly taken the judge’s ruling to heart.
She has continued to lob cheap shots at Laurie and her (Laurie’s) attorney.
These cheap shots are about the Standard Addition neighborhood and even Laurie’s
own home. Thornton continues to post comments on websites and blogs that
contain little digs directed at Laurie. Laurie believes it is a matter of time
before the settlement will be considered void and the lawsuit will be
reinstated.
The key points are that Thornton continues to believe that
she is above the law. Her vendetta toward Laurie has been curtailed but has not
ended. Thornton continues to seek out
avenues to gain attention and manipulate thoughts, rumors, speculations and even
the facts themselves to suit her own purpose.
This has to be stopped.
Since Rosemary’s husband is an attorney I wonder how he is
advising her. Seems like he might advise her to be more careful with the
accusations she has levied against the Fargo’s since there are living relatives
that have been offended by Thornton’s false portrayal of the events of 1901.
When false statements are made this is called Defamation, when they are written
or typed – even on the internet – it is called Slander. Thornton is certainly
guilty of both regarding the Fargo name.
But then again, her husband is an attorney. Take a look at
this. It’s long and boring but you can get theidea that someone is unhappy with
the way Wayne conducted himself.
http://blog.vivianpaige.com/2009/10/12/norfolk-city-attorney-tries-to-swat-a-gnat-and-it-swats-back/
I’m not naïve. I understand that an attorney’s first
responsibility is to the client. Even if it means personal values must be
compromised along the way.
But look at this…….
I would hope the person that told me I am insensitive to
abused women reads this to see what insensitivity if all about.
Attorneys are not privileged to do and say what they want,
there are repercussions. There are
repercussions for Thornton as well as the evidence is mounting.
Draw your own conclusions.
Note from Laurie – I changed some of your wording &
details as I feel something’s are better left off of the internet – I hope you can forgive me for
that. But, I am comfortable with everything that is written above. This period
of my life was pure hell; I even developed Bell’s Palsy from the stress of it
all.
I grew up in a very dysfunctional family, but I became who I
am not because of my family, but in spite of my family. I have a book coming
out about this; it is titled, “Walking on Eggshells.” There is only so much
that you can blame on others regarding abuse – this concerns you being called
insensitive to abused women - and then, the abuser can’t take the blame
anymore. The abused person needs to get themselves out of the situation. Addie
was supposedly a smart, articulate lady with tons of friends and a socialite in
Lake Mills. Don’t you think that if this abuse really was going on, one of
those friends would have saw it and stopped it in the 5 years of marriage? At
the very least Addie would have left and never came back – she had just
returned from a long trip away from Enoch – why did she return? I think to say that
Addie was shot by Enoch is stretching the truth a bit much.
Remember that game we all played in grammar school where the
teacher would put us all in a circle in the floor and she would tell the first
child a story an he or she had to tell the next person the story and so on and
so on, then by the time it got through thirty 5th or 6th graders to the last
one, the story was completely different. Then give that story to someone who
manipulates facts or exaggerates or adds to the story and you could have a
murder mystery.
Well I have news for a lot of people, this same thing –
although it isn’t a game anymore, also happens with adults and history.
I believe it has happened with Enoch and Addie.
If you believe the Fargo name has been defamed or slandered
– then fight with everything you can to clear it. If it was my great
grandfather I would do it in a heartbeat.
Thanks for allowing me to talk about my experience with a
purely evil person on your blog.
Maybe karma has finally caught up.
Laurie
