Welcome to <strong>FICAN</strong>.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, <a href="/profile.php?mode=register">join our community today</a>! <li>Also don't forget to visit our web site for more information at <a href="http://ficanetwork.net">ficanetwork.net</a><li>

Benchmark SUES Michael Crawford for speaking out.

This school is for "kids" 18 & over. But it operates in the same ways that many of the under 18 programs do. It's a strange twist on "the Program." Read on, to learn more.

Benchmark SUES Michael Crawford for speaking out.

Postby FICAN » Thu Apr 17, 2008 9:45 pm

Actually they are seeking to sue Michael Crawford and "Does 1-50"


These programs really don't like the truth to be told.

Can you say SLAPP suit??

Just in case you are unfamiliar with the terminology, here is an explanation from NOLO.com:
http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/Term ... 0/alpha/S/

SLAPP suit

A Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, in which a corporation or developer sues an organization in an attempt to scare it into dropping protests against a corporate initiative. SLAPP suits typically involve the environment--for example, local residents who are petitioning to change zoning laws to prevent a real estate development might be sued in a SLAPP suit for interference with the developer's business interests. Many states have "anti-SLAPP suit" statutes that protect citizens' rights to free speech and to petition the government.


hmm in the state of California....


The U.S. state of California enacted Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16 in 1992, a statute intended to prevent the misuse of litigation in SLAPP suits. It provides for a special motion which a defendant can file at the outset of a lawsuit to strike a complaint where the complaint arises from conduct that falls within the rights of petition or free speech. The statute expressly applies to any writing or speech made in connection with an issue under consideration or review by a legislative, executive, or judicial proceeding, or any other official proceeding authorized by law, but there is no requirement that the writing or speech be promulgated directly to the official body. It also applies to speech in a public forum about an issue of public interest and to any other petition or speech conduct about an issue of public interest.

The filing of an anti-SLAPP motion prevents the plaintiff from amending the complaint and stays all discovery. If the special motion is denied, the filing of an appeal immediately stays the trial court proceedings as to each challenged cause of action. Defendants prevailing on an anti-SLAPP motion (including any subsequent appeal) are entitled to a mandatory award of reasonable attorney’s fees. More than 200 published court opinions have interpreted and applied California's anti-SLAPP law.

California's Code of Civil Procedure § 425.17 corrects abuse of the anti-SLAPP statute (CCP § 425.16). Signed into law on September 6, 2003, this statute prohibits anti-SLAPP motions in response to certain public interest lawsuits and class actions, and actions that arise from commercial statements or conduct. Section 425.18, signed into law on October 6, 2005, was enacted to facilitate SLAPP victims in recovering their damages through a SLAPPback (malicious prosecution action) against the SLAPP filers and their attorneys after the underlying SLAPP has been dismissed.
link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLAPP#California

But since Michael has proof to back up every one of his allegations, I'm sure he won't even worry about this civil procedure.

Good Luck to you, Michael Crawford :)
~Parents, please make an informed decision!~
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 146
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 4:36 pm
Location: USA


Here is the STRUGGLING TEENS site's take on the lawsuit

Postby FICAN » Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:36 pm

Keep in mind, that Lon Woodbury who runs the site strugglingteens.com is indeed an educational consultant who receives money from Benchmark in exchange for advertising the Benchmark School on his site. He has published "New Perspective reports" as well as "visitation Report" from visits to Benchmark since at least as far back as 1995. The links are as follows:

http://www.strugglingteens.com/1812.php as
http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives ... /np03.html
http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives ... sit02.html - This visit report from Lon gives a glowing review of the program.

Ok now here is the write-up about the lawsuit: Link: http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 0419.shtml

Posted: Apr 19, 2008

Benchmark Young Adult School
Redlands, CA

Benchmark Young Adult School Fights Back

Shelley Skaggs
[email protected]

April 18, 2008

Benchmark Young Adult School announces today that they have filed a lawsuit against a disgruntled former Benchmark student who has repeatedly engaged in a campaign against Benchmark on certain internet sites. The statements he has made regarding Benchmark are false and defamatory. As a result, Benchmark Young Adult School has filed the lawsuit and intends to vigorously prosecute.

For additional questions, please call our Admissions office at 800-474-4848 or to view a copy of the lawsuit, please visit our web site at www.benchmarkyoungadultschool.com.

Click Here to view the complaint.

~Parents, please make an informed decision!~
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 146
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 4:36 pm
Location: USA

Postby psy » Tue Apr 22, 2008 11:01 pm

For those who don't already know, there is a thread on the topic here on fornits:
Benchmark v. Crawford
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 7:28 pm

Return to Benchmark Young Adult School

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest