A PSYCHIC EYE ON WALL STREET:

Wall Street Reporter magazine sues psychic for $3.2 million; claims, "He was untruthful"
Gets $0.00
By Marcus Goodwin
Monday, March 26, 2001
Copyright © 2001 marcusgoodwin.com. All rights reserved.

I arrived at New York Supreme Court the other day to answer a claim that alleges I owe a certain Wall Street Reporter magazine a whopping $3.2 million for writing some objectionable commentary. I suddenly found myself smack-dab-in-the-middle of a First Amendment case that would make your hair stand up: legal papers, men in suits, third parties, people getting up and down when more important people entered the room, court officers with guns -- the works.

After sitting in court for a few days, I came to the realization that perhaps my opinions regarding WSR were a tad harsh, and quite possibly, incorrect.

The truth is: I never intended to challenge the honesty of the good folks at WSR. Sure, the magazine and I had a falling out, and it's obvious we really don't care for each other's style or grace, but it might not have given me permission to throw water at their integrity, or call them a sham.

I apologize.

Reason, Schmeason,
Perhaps my intention in writing the piece was to simply show people that our top corporate leaders really are just ordinary people -- as are doctors, politicians and lawyers -- and that they may have streaks of vanity just like everyone else. Perhaps my intention was to help people make the best possible investment decisions prior to investing -- or -- perhaps to supply some real answers to the bigger bewilderment: why the NASDAQ and NYSE continue to tank to record lows.

Fed Chair Alan Greenspan

I think we'd all like an answer to that one.

Bad press,
Although some of my own greatest media attention has evolved out of bad press, I now understand it is not the same for everyone. Not everyone can make a good situation from a bad. I personally thrive on that sort of thing. Others, obviously do not -- or I wouldn't have been sued (?).

I remember a time when WWOR TV Channel 9 bashed some of my stock picks and my book THE PSYCHIC INVESTOR (Adams Media 2000) right on the 10 o'clock news. "Holy cow!" I said. "Those scoundrels!" They even misquoted one of my picks, Cisco Systems (NASDAQ:CSCO), as being a deadbeat at the time. Cisco was actually one of my biggest gainers. (They didn't account for the split).

But smart investors who where watching the news that night knew it was Channel 9 that made the blunder. As a result, my book roared to the top 4,000 best selling books on Amazon.com.

Thanks guys.

But, again, perhaps bad press doesn't always pan out the same for everyone.

Bill

Think,
For me, being sued for something I said in cyberspace is a time of quiet contemplation, learning, and a time to recognize a need to sometimes compromise with people I don't necessarily agree with; perhaps even relish in the spirit of forgiveness; to turn the other cheek, and say, "live and let live."

I stand behind my work as a psychic / writer, and although I try to exercise an almost explicable empathy that would enable me to walk in the shoes of those whose lives are so very different from my own, I believe -- at least in this case -- it's best to just bow out gracefully.

Spirit,
As I stood waiting to see the judge from the balcony at New York Supreme Court, the answer to my many dilemmas came to me in a rush. As I gazed down the heart of the building at the remarkable marble floor that contains the 12 signs of the zodiac, solutions flowed to me like water. Beneath the elegantly painted ceilings of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and various archaic abstractions are the 12 astrological signs; 12 signs that were placed there to channel subliminal information from the cosmos.

I felt at home.

I wondered if the busy lawyers that rush to and fro ever stopped to consider just how this zodiac can be used -- and why our forefathers so cleverly placed it there. And I wondered if those same forefathers were watching over us now.

That day -- they apparently were.

As I leaned toward the zodiac I heard the sound of a chairman's gavel smack, and a sincere voice declare, "The Supreme Court is an instrument of liberty and equality. It was set forth to establish that the phrases of our Constitution are not just archaic abstractions but living, vibrant guarantees of freedom and equality."

The words seemed to flow from the mouth of Abraham Lincoln.

Standing in the great Manhattan space, I heard a second voice; it was "the unofficial voice of the First Amendment," Justice William Brennan [1906-1997]. In support of free speech, Judge Brennan's words echoed from the archives of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964) to say, "We consider this case against the background of a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open… erroneous statement is inevitable in free debate…if the freedoms of expression are to have the 'breathing space' that they need to survive."

I closed my eyes for a moment and gave thanks for the messages thus far received. Then I heard yet another voice. This time it was the great philosopher Socrates communicating from his own trial. I heard him announce, "I believe justice is in what I say, and let none of you expect anything else."

Thanks Socrates.

Then it was Judge Learned Hand's turn to say something; "The First Amendment," he exclaimed, "presupposes that right conclusions are more likely to be gathered out of a multitude of tongues, than through any kind of authoritative selection. To many this is, and always will be, folly; but we have staked upon it our all."

I shuck my head in agreement.

A man then tapped me on the back and asked if I was ok. I must have seemed bewildered standing on the ledge like that, but when I turned to answer him, he was gone. I certainly heard his voice - and certainly felt him tapping -- but when I turned to look, nobody was there.

Then I heard the voice of Supreme Justice Powell come to me. I turned back to the zodiac, and I heard the good Judge pound his fist to the table and shout, "The first remedy of any victim of defamation is self-help -- using available opportunities to contradict the lie or correct the error and thereby minimize its adverse impact on reputation."

A very noble thought, I thought. But do we ever really exercise a "self-help" remedy? Or is our natural tendency to lash out at our accusers?

Victim,
Throughout this whole ordeal, I keep thinking of myself as a casualty of some horrific injustice. To exemplify my point, I thought of arriving to court that day dressed in a robe like the great freedom fighter, Mahatma Gandhi.

Gandhi in India

But then I thought: What if the judge doesn't get the point, and thinks I'm a crackpot; decides to throw me in jail for attempting to make a mockery of his courtroom. That wouldn't be fun.

So I put on my best suit and tie, and tried to blend in amongst the lawyers.

Gandhi's creed of passive resistance against injustice, Satyagraha, meaning truth force, frequently got him jailed as a result of the protests that he led. But Gandhi was an advocate of free expression like no other, and a man who was rarely ignored.

As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. observed, "Gandhi was inevitable. If humanity is to progress, Gandhi is inescapable. He lived, thought and acted, inspired by the vision of humanity evolving toward a world of peace and harmony. We may ignore Gandhi at our own risk."

And as Albert Einstein added, "Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as this ever in flesh and blood walked upon this earth."

Gandhi in London, 1931

Face the music,
The noise settled for a moment; everything went quiet. Then in another moment of clarity I noticed it was time to face the reality of my own actions: my alleged "defamatory" rhetoric.

With certain realities of the law now being channeled to me, I now heard a more real voice call out my name in the courtroom, "All rise, this court is now in session. Wall Street Reporter v. Marcus Goodwin, case number 104232-01, please approach the bench."

My mouth went dry.

And through it all, I held to the certainty that there are 2 types of individuals in the world. In US politics, we recognize it as democrat and republican; and in Asia, we call it Yin and Yang. There are those amongst us who genuinely care for other people; who are concerned about equal rights and the fate of the environment. And there are those who care only for themselves, and their own self-interests.

I pray that I am the former, but I am open to the human possibility that at times I may frolic in the latter. Heaven help me.

On the wall behind the judge read the words "In God We Trust." So I prayed to the God of my understanding as I approached the bench, and I prayed that the good judge would see an honest person who cares about people, and a person who has taken a straightforward stab at true service to his fellow man; not a power-monger out to trash people in cyberspace as his accusers have presupposed.

Home,
As I walked out of the Manhattan courthouse that last day, in route to my favorite Vietnamese eatery in Chinatown, I couldn't help to wonder if any of this made sense to anyone but myself. Does anyone really care? I questioned why the good spirits directed me here. And upon leaving the building -- and after devouring a full plate of grilled pork over noodles -- I was still puzzled.

As I exited the 6-train at the Spring Street station one block south of my apartment on Prince Street, I heard yet another voice come to me. It was the voice of the good judge who resided over my case; "Marcus," he whispered, "words can sting. Treat others as you would like to be treated, and pray for them."

So I closed my eyes on the subway platform and prayed for an amicable agreement between WSR and myself. Then I heard a final voice on free expression come to me. It was the same voice of the man who tapped me on the shoulder in court -- then vanished -- and now reappeared to offer his input. It was Mahatma Gandhi...

What's fair is fair,
I make it a point in my life to speak boldly and practice humility -- and when I write -- to operate without fear. The voices that supported me throughout court -- and rang in my ears throughout those 2 memorable days -- were confirming the idea that peace and harmony are attainable only by virtue of free speech. But what is new to me, here, is the notion that people have an equal right not to be put though the ringer for having a dissimilar point of view. I believe Gandhi would have agreed. As every person has a right to free speech, so does every person have a right not to be bushwhacked for having an offbeat opinion.

Fascinating.

Words,
As the old saying goes, "The pen is mightier than the sword." But I now believe -- more so than ever -- that spoken or written language can truly sting like nothing else; that written words on paper and or computer screen are much more than just "art."

They are life itself.

Words are our most powerful means of changing the world we live in. And if used correctly, words will do exactly that -- change the world forever. But if misconstrued, words may take the role of gun or sword.

Words are then punishable, as are the most powerful weapons in our arsenal.

(Let'em stick that in their Constitution).

.
eMail Marcus: psychicism@earthlink.net
.