日志

修正诉状 Amended Complaint

已有 11176 次阅读2019-2-17 11:56 |系统分类:曾彦玲造谣案

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

MIDDLESEX, ss SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT

OF THE TRIAL COURT

______________________________

Yong Li, )

Plaintiff, )

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1881CV03670

Yanling (Rebecca) Zeng, )

____________________Defendant. )

AMENDED COMPLAINT, COMPENSATORY

AND JURY DEMAND

INTRODUCTION

The Plaintiff, Yong Li, brings this lawsuit against Defendant Yanling (Rebecca) Zeng charging defamation.

Jurisdictions

This court has jurisdiction over the matter of Defamation and Negligence under Common Tort Law;

Parties

Plaintiff, Yong Li (“Li”), is a former software developer at Raytheon Company and currently a landlady who owns a house in Sudbury MA. Plaintiff is also a web builder, a web writer, a website owner, and she is the CEO of Green Bees Multicultural Inc., a nonprofit organization.
Defendant Yanling (Rebecca) Zeng (“Zeng”) is a real estate agent who lives in 75 Kato Drive, Sudbury MA. Tel.: (508) 656 0889. Email: rebecca.zeng@gmail.com.

Facts

Plaintiff worked at Raytheon Company for 7 years. According to Raytheon’s performance review, she was “a valuable employee” and “an asset of the team” who “contributed greatly.” The human resources (“HR”) witness form stated “She [Plaintiff]was never confrontational.”
When Plaintiff lost her job in 2005, she filed a lawsuit against Raytheon charging discrimination. Based on her litigation experience, she joined the NAACP and ACLU, set up her own civil rights team, and provided a web service named “Call me please if you were mistreated by your boss” [the Chinese word is ‘老板整你请找我’]”. Since 2010, Plaintiff and her team have helped new immigrants who encountered difficulties in the U.S. Plaintiff set up a nonprofit organization, Green Bees Multicultural Inc., and is the CEO (chief executive officer) of the organization.
Plaintiff did not know Defendant Zeng until the beginning of 2016, when Zeng, a real estate agent, visited the Plaintiff’s house in Sudbury at the Plaintiff’s request to provide and estimate of the house’s sales value. Other than that single occasion, Plaintiff and Defendant have never met each other.
On February 29, 2016, Zimeng Xue, a 22-year-old Chinese woman enrolled at Brandeis University, committed suicide.
Soon after, Plaintiff posted messages in the local Chinese WeChat (a communication tool through smart phones) groups, and she urged people to push Brandeis University to do a thorough investigation regarding to Xue’s death.
In response to Plaintiff’s posts, Defendant Zeng posted messages in WeChat groups characterizing Plaintiff as a “strong personality” and “delusional.” Plaintiff used WeChat ID “zeber” rather than her real name. Defendant Zeng attempted to unveil Plaintiff’s ID in order to show that she knew the Plaintiff personally.
On December 11, 2018, Plaintiff and Defendant were both involved in a chat in a WeChat group called “SFFS v. Harvard University Discrimination against Asian Students.” (The original Chinese name is: 1群-SFFA告哈佛歧视亚裔学生).
With respect to Defendant’s hobby of unveil Plaintiff’s ID, Plaintiff posted the following message to the group: “I have lived in Boston for many years, and this is the first time I have met someone who has no personal character. She came to my house only once and she believes that she knows everything about me. People who have known me for 20 years do not claim [to know me as well as this woman who met me only once]”. (The original Chinese words: 在波士顿这么多年，第一次碰到没有人品的。来我家一趟，还以知情者自居。人家认识我20年的人都不出头。)
In response to the Plaintiff’s message, Defendant posted this message to the group: “Are you attacking my character? I believe that everyone who knows me knows what my character is. Those kinds of pink-news [a Chinese term for erotic story or sex gossip] about you have nothing to do with me. Please pay attention to yourself. You can take whatever medicine you want, but you can’t say whatever [comes to your mind]. (The original Chinese words: 你没事在骂我没人品吗？相信认识我的人都知道我的人品如何，你的各种绯闻与我无关，请你自重。你药可以乱吃，话可不要乱说) ”
The words “Those kinds of pink-news [sex rumors or erotic stories] about you ...” suggest that such rumors exist. This is false. The Defendant is spreading a rumor to the group of 437 members by mentioning this while at the same time denying knowledge of it.
Defendant then posted :“I have a wide area of activities and a lot of contacts with people. This is the first time I have heard that my character is not good, but I will not cater to people at the trash level. I believe that the people in the group look at your endless arguments. It is easy to guess that you have delusional symptoms. I also saw the opinions of the group of friends and found that their words are similar. It seems that the whole village [Town of Sudbury] has a very consistent opinion about the rumor regarding you, and it is not good to switch black and white! (The original Chinese words: 我活动区域很广，接触人很多，我头一次听说我人品不好，不过我不会取悦垃圾级别的人。相信这里群里的人看你这些天滔滔不绝的大论，都难免猜想你有臆想症吧，我也是看到群友对你的评价，发现这词非常贴切。好像跟整个村对你的流传非常一致，颠倒是非黑白就不好了！) ”
The Plaintiff felt this was strange because the Plaintiff has almost no personal contact with local Sudbury people. The Plaintiff has lived in another town for years, and returns to Sudbury to pick up mail and look after her house. The Plaintiff does not know of any rumors about her, including any sex gossip. However, the Plaintiff did feel something was wrong. In the last two years, people in the local Sudbury WeChat group were sometimes rude to the Plaintiff for no apparent reason. The Plaintiff does not know who those people are because they use WeChat ID. The Plaintiff believes that if any rumors had been spread, the only person who could be spreading them is Defendant Zeng because she is the only person who knows the Plaintiff and she is active in the Sudbury area.
Defendant then continuously posted :”Can you allow me to post your real name and let everyone see your history online? There were rumors spreading among the villagers [in the Sudbury area], but I’m not involved in your business. I don't know why you are so hostile to me. I was forced to say these words tonight, even if someone asked me about you, I would never talk about someone like you! (The original Chinese words: 你可以允许我把你的真名实姓写出来的话，让大家到网上查看你的历史吗？这都是村民之间流传的，我跟你没有任何瓜葛，不知道你为啥对我这么仇视。被你今晚逼得说了这些话，原来就算有人问我你的事，我可从来不讨论你这样的人！)
In response to Defendant Zeng’s defamation, Plaintiff posted this message: “Nonsense, do you want me to bring you to court and sue you for defamation, so that you will lose your houses? (The original Chinese words: 胡说八道的，要不要我把你拖上法庭，告你一个诽谤，你几个房子都赔掉。)”
After a while, the group owner, WeChat ID Jessicaz8215, removed the Plaintiff from the group of 437 members. Jessicaz8215 failed to take any action to stop the defamation.
On December 14, 2018, Plaintiff contacted with Defendant through WeChat and tried to discuss the litigation issue. Plaintiff hoped this would provide an opportunity to settle the problem before the case went to court, but Zeng replied: “Please do not contact me any more. (The original Chinese words are: 希望你不要再联系我).” When Plaintiff told Defendant that a sheriff could serve a summons to her, the Defendant answered :“Good, I’m waiting to see who will pay the compensation (The original Chinese words are: 好的，我等着看谁应该付赔偿费用).”
Therefore, Defendant made her defamatory statements to a group of 437 people, and she knew they were false. Defendant acted in bad faith, and was both reckless and negligent.

Count I:

(Libel, Defamation under Common Tort Law against

Defendant Zeng.)

Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in paragraphs one through nineteen as fully set forth herein. The action of the Defendant set forth above constitutes Libel in Violation of Defamation under common tort law.

Count II:

(Slander, Defamation under Common Tort Law against

Defendant Zeng.)

Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in paragraphs one through nineteen as if fully set forth herein. The action of the Defendant set forth above constitute Slander in Violation of Defamation under common tort law.

Count III:

(Negligence under Common Tort Law against

Defendant Zeng.)

Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in paragraphs one through nineteen as if fully set forth herein. The action of the Defendant set forth above constitute Negligence under common tort law.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff Yong Li requests that this Court order the Defendant Zeng to pay Plaintiff.

One million dollars, which includes but is not limited to:
Compensation for damage to Plaintiff’s reputation, her activities, and her nonprofit organization;
Emotional distress damages;
Punitive damages;
Costs as provided for by statute; and
Any other relief to which Plaintiff may be entitled.