1 2

RUFUS-ISAACS ACLAND & GRANTHAM LLP ALEXANDER RUFUS-ISAACS, State Bar No. 135747

SUPERCOR COURT ' OF CALIFO OUNTY OF ORANGE RNIA CENI RAL JUSTIC E CENTE

F ILE D

aisaacs@rufuslaw.com

AU G

O 2D12
urt

3
4 5 6 7

9601 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 710 Beverly Hills, California 90210 Telephone: (310) 274-3803 Facsimile: (310) 859-7743 Attorneys for Plaintiff DAVID WILLIAMS

ALAN CARLSO N, Clerk 0' the Co

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 8 COUNTY OF ORANGE, CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER 9 10
DAVID WILLIAMS, an individual, Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC., a Delaware corporation, KELLEY CAHILL, an individual, CHRISTOPHER CUOMO, an individual, JACK PYLE, an individual, and DOES 1-10, Defendants. CASE No. 30-2012-00578899-CU-DF-CJC

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR (1) LIBEL (re CAHILL); (2) LIBEL (re ABC); (3) LIBEL (re REBROADCAST); (4) INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
Assigned for All Purposes to the Hon. Charles Margines, Dept. C 19 Action Filed: Trial Date: June 22, 2012 None set

18 19 20 21 22
23 Plaintiff DAVID WILLIAMS, an individual ("WILLIAMS"), complains of defendants AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC., ("ABC"), KELLEY CAHILL ("CAHILL"), CHRISTOPHER CUOMO ("CUOMO"), JACK PYLE ('PYLE"), and DOES 1-10, and alleges as follows:

INTRODUCTION 24 25 26 27 28
8539.1.3.2e

1.

In early 2005, WILLIAMS and CAHILL met online and entered into a romantic

relationship, during which they bought a house and lived together. But when he found CAHILL in bed with another man in May 2006, WILLIAMS ended the relationship. This private matter would

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1 and should have ended there, had CAHILL not chosen to publicize a distorted version of their 2 relationship as a fable on the dangers of internet dating in order to promote her business. She 3 contacted numerous television shows claiming that after they had met online, WILLIAMS had 4 conned her out of hundreds of thousands of dollars and ruined her life, and she used this lie to 5 promote iCheckmates, a business she owns which purports to provide people with background 6 checks on potential dates whom they meet online. None of these shows broadcast the story except 7 ABCs so-called newsmagazine" television show, 20-20, 8 2. On June 24, 2011, ABC produced and broadcast an episode of 20-20 on national

9 television about the dangers of online dating, under the heading We Find Them. In the third
R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP
Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

10 segment entitled "Blinded By Love: Kelley Cahill's Ordeal" ("Story"), Defendants falsely stated or 11 implied that WILLIAMS was a dangerous internet predator who, over the past 11-12 years, had 12 induced CAHILL and a multitude of other women, whom he had met online, to enter into 13 romantic relationships with him under false pretenses so that he could prey on them financially, 14 sexually and emotionally. CAHILL, in particular, claimed to have been ruined by WILLIAMS 15 over the past 6 years. Despite being apprised of the false and defamatory nature of the Story in a 16 letter dated July 11, 2011, ABC not only refused to retract it but re-broadcast it on national 17 television in or about November 2011, and made it available online at http://abcnews.go.com. 18 3. CAHILL continues to make the Story available for public viewing on iCheckmates

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

19 website and Facebook pages, which she controls, and generally uses the Story as a tool to promote 20 iCheckmates. Moreover she has mounted an online vendetta against WILLIAMS by posting 21 multiple defamatory comments about him on public websites, often accompanied by photographs 22 of him and his personal data, and in emails to third parties, accusing him of being a predator, a 23 sociopath, a conman and a liar whose criminal conduct has caused her to lose $1.5 million, 24 among other false and defamatory statements. 25 4. All of these statements and implications were false WILLIAMS did not enter into

26 the relationship with CAHILL (or any other women) in order to take financial, sexual or emotional 27 advantage of her (or the other women) and has never taken money from CAHILL or any of the 28
8539.1.3.2e

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1 other women whom he dated. Rather CAHILLS financial problems were caused by her financial 2 irresponsibility, not by WILLIAMS who contributed far more to the relationship financially than 3 she did. 4 5. ABC falsely stated in the Story that WILLIAMS had refused to comment on

5 CAHILLS allegations, failed to engage in any, or any meaningful, research to determine whether 6 CAHILL was being truthful, and failed to give WILLIAMS any, or any meaningful, opportunity 7 to respond to the horrendous allegations that she made against him. 8 9
R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP
Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

PARTIES AND JURISDICTION 6. WILLIAMS is, and at all times herein mentioned was, an individual residing in the

10 state of Colorado. 11 7. WILLIAMS is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that ABC is, and at

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

12 all times herein mentioned was, a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in the 13 state of New York. 14 8. WILLIAMS is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that CAHILL is an

15 individual residing in Orange County, California. 16 9. WILLIAMS is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that CUOMO is an

17 individual residing in New York. 18 10. WILLIAMS is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that PYLE is an

19 individual residing in New York. 20 11. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, or otherwise, of those

21 defendants sued herein as DOES 1 through 10, inclusive are presently unknown to Plaintiff, who 22 therefore sue said defendants by fictitious names. Whenever in this Complaint reference is made 23 to Defendant(s), such allegation shall be deemed to mean the acts of all of the defendants 24 mentioned in this paragraph and those above, acting individually, jointly and/or severally. 25 12. WILLIAMS is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that at all relevant

26 times, each Defendant was an agent and/or employee of every other Defendant. In doing the 27 things alleged in the causes of action stated herein, every Defendant was acting within the course 28
8539.1.3.2e

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1 and scope of this agency or employment, and was acting with the consent, permission and 2 authorization of each of the remaining Defendants. All actions of each Defendant as alleged 3 herein were ratified and approved by every other Defendant or its officers or managing agents. 4 5 13. ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION WILLIAMS was married in 1983, and separated from his wife in 2003. They lived

6 apart from then until late 2006, when they had a reconciliation. In early 2005, WILLIAMS met 7 CAHILL online on www.match.com, a subscription dating website. CAHILL falsely stated in her 8 profile on www.match.com that she earned $150,000 p.a. and ran a successful business. 9 www.match.com requires subscribers to state whether they are single, married, separated or
R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP
Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

10 divorced, but does not differentiate between short term and long term separations, and when 11 completing his profile, WILLIAMS, who had consulted a divorce attorney, stated in that he was 12 divorced. On their second date, WILLIAMS told CAHILL that he was separated but not divorced. 13 14. WILLIAMS and CAHILL began to see each other regularly. CAHILL was being

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

14 evicted from her home, so WILLIAMS suggested they buy a house together. CAHILL agreed and 15 in August 2005, they purchased a residential property located at 2651 Redlands Drive, Costa 16 Mesa, CA 92627 (House) in CAHILLS name only. They agreed to share expenses equally and 17 that WILLIAMS interest in the House would be secured by a Deed of Trust. When trying to 18 arrange financing for the House, WILLIAMS found out that CAHILL had substantial debts, and 19 they obtained a second mortgage on the House which was mostly used to pay off her debts. He 20 also found that CAHILL could not afford to pay her share of the mortgage and other monthly 21 expenses, and therefore WILLIAMS frequently paid those expenses himself. On the few occasions 22 that CAHILL did contribute her share of the expenses, WILLIAMS later found out that she had 23 obtained the money as cash advances from credit cards and loans from family members, thereby 24 accumulating more debt. Despite this inability to live within her means, CAHILL engaged in 25 extravagant purchases, such as paying $3,000 to attend a party at the Playboy Mansion. Because 26 of her financial irresponsibility, WILLIAMS moved out of the House, but they continued to see 27 each other until WILLIAMS found CAHILL in bed with another man in May 2006, at which time 28
8539.1.3.2e

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1 he ended the relationship. CAHILL never signed the Deed of Trust and denied that WILLIAMS 2 had any interest in the House. She later refinanced the House by falsely inflating her income, and 3 used the entire proceeds to fund her extravagant lifestyle and pay off her debts. In 2008, she 4 declared bankruptcy, admitting that she earned $26,717 in 2005, $31,525 in 2006, and $15,392 in 5 2007. 6 15. In or about January 2010, WILLIAMS was contacted by a producer on The Dr.

7 Phil Show, CBS daytime television talk show, who stated that CAHILL had accused him of 8 defrauding her out of $1.5 million and asked if he wanted to comment. WILLIAMS told the 9 producer that the accusations were false and suggested that she check the public records such as
R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP
Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

10 CAHILLS bankruptcy filing, the foreclosure proceedings on the House, and ask CAHILL for 11 financial records, such as their joint checking account, and if the producer could not find those 12 records, he told her to call him back and he would find them. He heard no more from The Dr. Phil 13 Show which never broadcast a story about CAHILL or him. 14 16. WILLIAMS alleges upon information and belief that CAHILL contacted numerous

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

15 other television shows to get them interested in broadcasting her story, but with one exception, her 16 efforts failed. The exception was 20-20. In or about January 2011, ABC employee CUOMO called 17 WILLIAMS to say that CAHILL was alleging that WILLIAMS had conned her out of hundreds of 18 thousands of dollars and ruined her life, and that she was starting an internet security company to 19 research the backgrounds of potential dates met on internet sites and that this was a subject of 20 great interest to 20-20. WILLIAMS told CUOMO precisely what he had told The Dr. Phil Show 21 producer, and expected to hear no more from him. But out of the blue, 5 months later, CUOMO 22 left a voicemail message for WILLIAMS on Tuesday June 21, 2011, stating that ABC was going 23 to broadcast CAHILLS story on Friday June 24, and asking WILLIAMS if he wanted to go on 24 the record. When WILLIAMS called back the next day, CUOMO again asked him if he wanted to 25 go on the record about CAHILLS allegation that he conned her, and when WILLIAMS said he 26 need to time to take advice, CUOMO aggressively told him there was no time and he needed the 27 comment immediately. Faced with this (for him) highly unusual and threatening situation, 28
8539.1.3.2e

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1 WILLIAMS warned CUOMO that he considered CAHILLS allegations against him to be 2 defamatory and if his name was mentioned in the broadcast, he would pursue legal remedies. 3 17. Nevertheless, on June 24, 2011, ABC produced and broadcast on national

4 television an episode of 20-20 which included a segment entitled "Blinded By Love: Kelley 5 Cahill's Ordeal" ("Story") which not only identified WILLIAMS by name, but showed numerous 6 photographs of him. In particular, CAHILL, CUOMO, who presented the Story, ABC employee 7 PYLE, who edited the Story, and DOE 6, who produced the Story, made false and defamatory 8 statements about WILLIAMS in the Story which ABC broadcast on national television on June 9 24, 2011, re-broadcast on national television in or about November 2011 and made available
R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP
Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

10 online at http://abcnews.go.com/2020/video/blinded-love-kelley-cahills-ordeal-13927622 for at 11 least one year. CAHILL has continued to make the Story available to the public online on 12 iCheckmates website and Facebook pages, which she controls. 13 14 (a) Defamatory Statement No. 1 In the Story, Defendants stated or implied that WILLIAMS betrayed CAHILL by

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

15 inducing her to enter into a relationship with him by telling her that he was divorced, whereas in 16 fact he was very married, never divorced, never separated. This is false: WILLIAMS separated 17 from his wife in or about 2003, and lived apart from her from then until late 2006; and 18 WILLIAMS told CAHILL on their second date he was separated from his wife, but was still 19 married. 20 21 (b) Defamatory Statement No. 2 In the Story, Defendants stated or implied that WILLIAMS profited financially by

22 inducing CAHILL to buy him lavish gifts such as a $5,000 watch, a new wardrobe, a Range 23 Rover. This is false: during the relationship, WILLIAMS spent more money on gifts for CAHILL 24 (including, but not limited to diamond jewelry, a camera, and Pilates lessons) than she spent on 25 gifts for him; the watch she gave him cost $2,500, not $5,000; WILLIAMS made the payments on 26 the Range Rover, not CAHILL; and he paid more of their joint expenses than she did. 27 28
8539.1.3.2e

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1 2 (c)

Defamatory Statement No. 3 In the Story, Defendants stated or implied that CAHILL suffered financial ruin as

3 a result of WILLIAMS. This is false: CAHILLS financial problems (which resulted in her filing 4 for bankruptcy in 2008) were caused by her propensity to live beyond her means, not by 5 WILLIAMS; during the relationship, WILLIAMS paid more of their joint expenses than CAHILL 6 did; the proceeds of the second mortgage on the House were mostly used for CAHILLs benefit; 7 the proceeds of the refinancing of the House were used entirely for CAHILLS benefit; and 8 CAHILL denied that WILLIAMS owned any interest in the House, and instead asserted that she 9 alone owned the House, whereas they had agreed that he would own a half interest therein.
R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP
Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

10 11 (d)

Defamatory Statement No. 4 In the Story, Defendants stated or implied that WILLIAMS had taken sexual,

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

12 emotional and/or financial advantage of at least half a dozen women other than CAHILL, whom 13 ABC had found living in Southern California, who had fallen prey to WILLIAMS lies and 14 infidelity. This is false: WILLIAMS has never "preyed" on any women, and during his 15 relationships, WILLIAMS romantic feelings for CAHILL and the other women he dated were 16 genuine; WILLIAMS never took money from any of those women, nor did he benefit financially 17 from those relationships. 18 19 (e) Defamatory Statement No. 5 In the Story, Defendants stated or implied that, WILLIAMS was a serial online

20 predator who had "preyed" on a "multitude of women" in addition to CAHILL over the past 10-11 21 years by forming relationships with them by using lies and infidelity in order to take sexual, 22 emotional and/or financial advantage of them. This is false: WILLIAMS has never "preyed" on any women; WILLIAMS is not a predator; during his relationships, WILLIAMS romantic 23 feelings for CAHILL and the other women he dated were genuine; WILLIAMS never took money 24 from any of those women, nor did he benefit financially from those relationships. 25 26 27 28
8539.1.3.2e

Defamatory Statement No. 6 (f) In the Story, Defendants stated or implied that WILLIAMS was a notorious online

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1 predator who was regularly featured on websites such as www.cheateralert.com. This is false: 2 WILLIAMS is not a predator; CAHILL posted his name and photograph in those websites, 3 posted hostile and/or defamatory statements against him on those websites, and encouraged other 4 women to do the same. 5 6 (g) Defamatory Statement No. 7 In the Story, CUOMO stated or implied that he had asked WILLIAMS to comment

7 on CAHILLS allegations, but WILLIAMS had refused. This is false: when CUOMO first 8 approached WILLIAMS in or about January 2011 about these allegations, WILLIAMS suggested 9 to CUOMO that he check certain records which would show that CAHILL was a liar, and to let 10 him (WILLIAMS) know if he (CUOMO) could not find those documents; CUOMO did not 11 contact WILLIAMS again until June 21-22, 2011, when he told WILLIAMS that ABC was going 12 to broadcast the Story on June 24 (despite the fact that the "Story" was 5 years old at this point), 13 thereby failing to allow WILLIAMS adequate time to consider his position and obtain advice; and 14 WILLIAMS warned CUOMO on June 22 that he considered CAHILLS allegations against him to 15 be defamatory and that if his name was mentioned in the broadcast, he would pursue all available 16 legal remedies. 17 18. CAHILL and DOES 1-5 made false and defamatory statements about WILLIAMS

R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP

Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

18 in other media, including, without limitation, the following: 19 20 (a) Defamatory Statement No. 8 On http://www.cheaterville.com/?page=cheaters&id=18327&sid=45156, a public

21 website, CAHILL posted a comment about WILLIAMS, stating or implying that he had conned 22 many women for years by falsely pretending to romance said women in order to take financial 23 advantage of them. Further, she posted WILLIAMS name and personal details, and uploading a 24 photograph of him, on said website. She further published said statement by posting a link to this 25 website page on iCheckmates Facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/iCheckmates on April 26 13, 2012, and on iCheckmates twitter account at https://twitter.com/icheckmates. This is false. 27 WILLIAMS has never entered into a romantic relationship with anyone in order to benefit 28
8539.1.3.2e

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1 financially, nor has he taken financial advantage of any women. 2 3 (b) Defamatory Statement No. 9 On http://www.cheaterville.com/?page=cheaters&id=4237, a public website,

4 CAHILL posted a comment stating that WILLIAMS took cash from the House to which he was 5 not entitled and that she was left with the responsibility for repaying her family, various banks and 6 others. This is false. CAHILL took most of the money from the second mortgage and the 7 refinancing of the House, including a large sum to which WILLIAMS was entitled, and 8 squandered it on an extravagant lifestyle for herself that she could not afford. 9
R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP
Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

Defamatory Statement No. 10 (c) On http://liarscheatersrus.com/kelley-cahill.html, a public website, CAHILL posted

10

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

11 a comment stating that she knew 7 women currently that (WILLIAMS) conned and deceived and 12 got money from several. This is false. WILLIAMS has never benefitted financially from his 13 relationships or taken money from women he dated. 14 15 (d) Defamatory Statement No. 11 On http://liarscheatersrus.com/kelley-cahill.html, a public website, CAHILL posted

16 a comment stating or implying that WILLIAMS had conned a woman into co-signing on a car 17 for him. This is false. WILLIAMS has never acted in the manner alleged. 18 19 (f) Defamatory Statement No. 12 On http://liarscheatersrus.com/kelley-cahill.html, a public website, CAHILL posted

20 a comment stating or implying that WILLIAMS had ruined his wifes credit and that he owes her 21 money. This is false. WILLIAMS has never acted in the manner alleged. 22 23 (g) Defamatory Statement No. 13 On http://liarscheatersrus.com/kelley-cahill.html, a public website, CAHILL posted

24 a comment stating or implying that WILLIAMS had been fired from almost every job he has ever 25 had. This is false. WILLIAMS left several jobs voluntarily, and was rehired by some employers 26 after he had left. 27 28
8539.1.3.2e

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1 2 (h)

Defamatory Statement No. 14 On http://liarscheatersrus.com/kelley-cahill.html, a public website, CAHILL posted

3 a comment stating or implying that WILLIAMS stole from women. This is false. WILLIAMS has 4 never acted in the manner alleged. 5 6 (i) Defamatory Statement No. 15 On http://liarscheatersrus.com/kelley-cahill.html, a public website, CAHILL posted

7 a comment stating or implying that WILLIAMS had beaten up his son. This is false. 8 9
R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP
Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

Defamatory Statement No. 16 (j) On http://liarscheatersrus.com/kelley-cahill.html, a public website, CAHILL posted

10 a comment stating that WILLIAMS is a criminal, predator, liar, cheater, con fraud and scum 11 who took money from women and ruined get their credit. This is false. WILLIAMS has never 12 acted in the manner alleged. 13 14 (j) Defamatory Statement No. 17 On http://www.playerblock.com/Users/Kelley-Cahill.aspx, a public website,

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

15 CAHILL posted a comment about WILLIAMS using his name, photograph and personal details, 16 and stating that he has conned women out of money, used other women's credit. This is false. 17 WILLIAMS has never acted in the manner alleged. 18 19 (k) Defamatory Statement No. 18 On www.cheateralert.com, a public website, CAHILL posted a comment about

20 WILLIAMS stating or implying that he conned her out of money and thereby committed criminal 21 offences. This is false. WILLIAMS has never acted in the manner alleged. 22 23 (l) Defamatory Statement No. 19 CAHILL sent an email to a woman whom she did not know but believed that she

24 was dating WILLIAMS. In that email, she stated or implied that as a result of her relationship with 25 WILLIAMS, she had lost $1.5 million, and that she knew of 7 other women whom WILLIAM had 26 conned and from whom he had obtained money in a criminal manner. This is false. WILLIAMS 27 has never acted in the manner alleged, and any losses that CAHILL incurred were as a result of 28
8539.1.3.2e

10

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1 her financial irresponsibility, not as a result of her relationship with WILLIAMS or anything that 2 WILLIAMS did. 3 4 (k) Defamatory Statement No. 20 In a video clip entitled The Date Detective which can be publicly viewed on

5 YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaP-ZosLkpg, and the accompanying text, 6 CAHILL stated or implied that she had been ripped off by WILLIAMS for $1.5 million and 7 promoted iCheckmates.com as a tool to help others from getting swindled or scammed like she 8 was. 9
R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP
Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION LIBEL (Against Defendants KELLEY CAHILL, and DOES 1-5) 19. WILLIAMS incorporates in this cause of action all allegations contained in

10 11

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

12 paragraph 1 through 18 of this Complaint as though set forth fully herein. 13 20. Each of the Defamatory Statements 1-20 inclusive (except 7) (the "KC Defamatory

14 Statements") is libelous on its face. 15 21. The KC Defamatory Statements expose WILLIAMS to injury to his reputation by

16 attributing to him the appearance of negative personal traits or attitudes that he does not possess, 17 including, but not limited to, being a dangerous internet predator who, over the past 11-12 years, 18 had induced CAHILL and a multitude of other women, whom he had met online, to enter into 19 romantic relationships with him under false pretenses so that he could prey on them financially, 20 sexually and emotionally. In addition, the KC Defamatory Statements falsely state or imply that 21 WILLIAMS acts in an unethical, criminal and/or dishonest manner. The KC Defamatory 22 Statements subject WILLIAMS to contempt and ridicule, injure him in his business, and cause 23 others to shun and avoid him. 24 22. The KC Defamatory Statements were published by CAHILL and DOES 1-5 as

25 alleged above with negligence and with Constitutional actual malice, knowing that they were false 26 or were made with a reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of what was stated. 27 28
8539.1.3.2e

23.

In a letter dated July 18, 2011 to CAHILL, WILLIAMS requested that she retract

11

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1 or correct the defamatory statements and implications pursuant to California Civil Code 48a. She 2 failed to do so and has continued to post false and defamatory statements about WILLIAMS on 3 various websites. 4 5 24. 25. WILLIAMS is not a public figure. The KC Defamatory Statements relates to private events that occurred, or are

6 alleged to have occurred in 2005-2006, and is not a news story. 7 26. As a proximate result of the foregoing, WILLIAMS has suffered actual damages,

8 including emotional distress damages, in an amount according to proof at trial but in any event in 9 excess of the jurisdictional threshold of the Superior Court.
R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP
Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

10

27.

The conduct of CAHILL and DOES 1-5 as described herein was done with a

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

11 conscious disregard of the rights of WILLIAMS, with the intent to vex, annoy, and/or harass him. 12 Such conduct was unauthorized and constitutes oppression, fraud, and/or malice under California 13 Civil Code 3294, entitling WILLIAMS to an award of punitive damages in an amount 14 appropriate to punish or set an example of CAHILL and DOES 1-5 in an amount to be 15 determined at trial. 16 28. The harm that the KC Defamatory Statements will cause to WILLIAMS in the

17 future is both great and irreparable and the amount of damage already sustained by him will be 18 difficult to further sustain if these acts continue. The conduct described above is ongoing, and 19 injunctive relief is necessary to prevent and restrain continued dissemination of the KC 20 Defamatory Statements. WILLIAMS requests that the court enter an injunction to requiring 21 CAHILL to remove the KC Defamatory Statements from the websites and blogs identified above, 22 and any others that are subsequently discovered. 23 24 25 26 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION LIBEL (Against Defendants AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC., CHRISTOPHER CUOMO, JACK PYLE, and DOES 6-10) 29. WILLIAMS incorporates in this cause of action all allegations contained in

27 paragraph 1 through 28 of this Complaint as though set forth fully herein. 28

8539.1.3.2e

12

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1 2

30. 31.

Defamatory Statements 1-6 inclusive are libelous on their face. Defamatory Statements 1-7 inclusive (the "ABC Defamatory Statements") expose

3 WILLIAMS to injury to his reputation by attributing to him the appearance of negative personal 4 traits or attitudes that he does not possess, including, but not limited to, being a dangerous internet 5 predator who, over the past 11-12 years, had induced CAHILL and a multitude of other women, 6 whom he had met online, to enter into romantic relationships with him under false pretenses so 7 that he could prey on them financially, sexually and emotionally. In addition, the ABC 8 Defamatory Statements falsely state or imply that WILLIAMS acts in an unethical and dishonest 9 manner. The ABC Defamatory Statements subject WILLIAMS to contempt and ridicule, injure
R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP
Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

10 him in his business, and cause others to shun and avoid him. 11 32. The ABC Defamatory Statements were published by ABC, CUOMO, PYLE, and

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

12 DOES 6-10 (collectively, the ABC Defendants) with negligence, in that ABC did not adhere to 13 minimum basis standards of fact checking and operated below the standard of care for news 14 journalists, and with Constitutional actual malice, knowing that they were false or were made with 15 a reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of what was stated. At the very least, the ABC 16 Defendants should have omitted WILLIAMS name and photograph from the Story. 17 33. In a letter dated July 11, 2011, to ABC, WILLIAMS requested that ABC retract or

18 correct the defamatory statements and implications pursuant to California Civil Code 48a. 19 Despite having been provided the true facts in said letter and other correspondence, thereby 20 exposing the baseless nature of CAHILLS vicious personal vendetta against WILLIAMS, ABC 21 has refused to do so and has continued to make the Story available on its website until recently. 22 23 34. 35. WILLIAMS is not a public figure. The ABC Defamatory Statements relates to private events that occurred, or are

24 alleged to have occurred in 2005-2006, and is not a news story. 25 36. As a proximate result of the foregoing, WILLIAMS has suffered actual damages,

26 including emotional distress damages, in an amount according to proof at trial but in any event in 27 excess of the jurisdictional threshold of the Superior Court. 28
8539.1.3.2e

13

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

37.

The ABC Defendants' conduct as described herein was done with a conscious

2 disregard of the rights of WILLIAMS, with the intent to vex, annoy, and/or harass him. Such 3 conduct was unauthorized and constitutes oppression, fraud, and/or malice under California Civil 4 Code 3294, entitling WILLIAMS to an award of punitive damages in an amount appropriate to 5 punish or set an example of the ABC Defendants in an amount to be determined at trial. 6 38. The harm that the ABC Defamatory Statements will cause to WILLIAMS in the

7 future is both great and irreparable and the amount of damage already sustained by him will be 8 difficult to further sustain if these acts continue. The conduct described above is ongoing, and 9 injunctive relief is necessary to prevent and restrain continued dissemination of the ABC
R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP
Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

10 Defamatory Statements. WILLIAMS requests that the court enter an injunction to requiring the 11 ABC Defendants to remove the ABC Defamatory Statements from all media that they control. 12 13 14 39. 15 paragraph 1 through 38 of this Complaint as though set forth fully herein. 16 40. 17 nature of the Story, ABC re-broadcast it in or about November 2011 on national television. The 18 ABC Defamatory Statements were published on this date by ABC, CUOMO, PYLE, and DOES 619 10 (collectively, the ABC Defendants) with negligence, in that ABC did not adhere to minimum 20 basis standards of fact checking and operated below the standard of care for news journalists, and 21 with Constitutional actual malice, knowing that they were false or were made with a reckless 22 disregard for the truth or falsity of what was stated. At the very least, the ABC Defendants should 23 have omitted WILLIAMS name and photograph from the Story. 24 41. 25 42. 26 alleged to have occurred in 2005-2006, and is not a news story. 27 43. 28
8539.1.3.2e

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION LIBEL (Against All Defendants) WILLIAMS incorporates in this cause of action all allegations contained in

Despite receiving the July 11 2011 letter which explained the false and defamatory

WILLIAMS is not a public figure. The ABC Defamatory Statements relate to private events that occurred, or are

As a proximate result of the foregoing, WILLIAMS has suffered actual damages, 14

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1 including emotional distress damages, in an amount according to proof at trial but in any event in 2 excess of the jurisdictional threshold of the Superior Court. 3 44. Defendants' conduct as described herein was done with a conscious disregard of the

4 rights of WILLIAMS, with the intent to vex, annoy, and/or harass him. Such conduct was 5 unauthorized and constitutes oppression, fraud, and/or malice under California Civil Code 3294, 6 entitling WILLIAMS to an award of punitive damages in an amount appropriate to punish or set 7 an example of the ABC Defendants in an amount to be determined at trial. 8 45. The harm that the ABC Defamatory Statements in the November 2011 rebroadcast

9 will cause to WILLIAMS in the future is both great and irreparable and the amount of damage
R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP
Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

10 already sustained by him will be difficult to further sustain if these acts continue. The conduct 11 described above is ongoing, and injunctive relief is necessary to prevent and restrain continued 12 dissemination of the ABC Defamatory Statements. WILLIAMS requests that the court enter an 13 injunction to requiring Defendants to remove the ABC Defamatory Statements from all public 14 media that they own or control. 15 16 17 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS (Against All Defendants) 46. WILLIAMS incorporate in this cause of action all allegations contained in

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

18 paragraph 1 through 45 of this Complaint as though set forth fully herein. 19 47. Defendants engaged in extreme and outrageous conduct with the intention of 20 causing, or reckless disregard of the probability of causing, severe emotional distress to 21 WILLIAMS. Defendants' conduct was so extreme and outrageous as to go beyond all possible 22 bonds of decency, and is regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. 23 48. WILLIAMS suffered severe emotional distress as a result of the Defamatory 24 Statements 1-20 and Defendants' conduct, including, but not limited to, anger, frustration, 25 humiliation, chagrin, fear and uncertainty, and a feeling of helplessness. 26 49. As a proximate result of the foregoing, WILLIAMS has suffered actual damages,

27 including emotional distress damages, in an amount according to proof at trial but in any event in 28
8539.1.3.2e

15

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1 excess of the jurisdictional threshold of the Superior Court. 2 50. Defendants' conduct as described herein was done with a conscious disregard of the

3 rights of WILLIAMS, with the intent to vex, annoy, and/or harass WILLIAMS. Such conduct was 4 unauthorized and constitutes oppression, fraud, and/or malice under California Civil Code 3294, 5 entitling WILLIAMS to an award of punitive damages in an amount appropriate to punish or set 6 an example of Defendants in an amount to be determined at trial. 7 51. The harm that the Defamatory Statements 1-20 will cause to WILLIAMS in the

8 future is both great and irreparable and the amount of damage already sustained by WILLIAMS 9 will be difficult to further sustain if these acts continue. The conduct described above is ongoing,
R U F U S -I S A A C S A C L A N D & GRANTHAM LLP
Tel (310) 274-3803 Fax (310) 859-7743

10 and injunctive relief is necessary to prevent and restrain continued dissemination of said 11 Defamatory Statements. WILLIAMS requests that the court enter an injunction to requiring 12 Defendants to remove said Defamatory Statements. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 DATED: July 31, 2012 22 23 By: 24 25 26 27 28
8539.1.3.2e

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90210

9601 WILSHIRE BLVD., SUITE 710

WHEREFORE, WILLIAMS prays for judgment against Defendants as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. For actual damages; For punitive damages; For preliminary and permanent injunctive relief; For costs of suit; and For such other, further relief as the Court deems proper under the circumstances.

RUFUS-ISAACS ACLAND & GRANTHAM LLP

Alexander Rufus-Isaacs Attorneys for Plaintiff DAVID WILLIAMS

16

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL AND INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS