In summary, Jamie is upset about a blog that Manchester Turtlette wrote in August of 2018, which was really about Offleash Training K-9 and the shady things they did leading up to the death of former Patriot Jerod Mayo’s dog Knox. Jamie was only briefly mentioned because it was alleged that his company was hired to track down the dog, and according to several sources he informed the Mayo family that the dog was dead in a pond in Wrentham. However, when the dog ended up being found dead in the trainer’s apartment later on many began coming forward and sharing similar stories about being told their dogs were dead by Jamie Genereux, when they were actually alive. Manch merely acted as the reporter passing along relevant information from witnesses who swore by their experiences. This is all legally protected speech, and the fact that this man is attempting to sue people who are complaining about his business is un-American, disgusting, and pathetic. The women he’s going after are great people who dedicate their free time to finding people’s missing dogs for free. They are doing God’s work, and because they don’t charge for it Jamie Genereux considers them a threat to his business.
Part 1 was about why he’s suing me (even though I had nothing to do with the blog). Part 2 is about why he’s suing the 10 other co-defendants, none of who have been served in the lawsuit which was filed over 2 months ago.
Missing Dogs Massachusetts is a non-profit staffed by volunteers who go out and find your dog when it’s missing. They don’t charge, and they use traditional methods like leaving fliers and cage traps. Their members have been vocally critical of Jamie for years because they allege that he rips off vulnerable and desperate people yearning to be reunited with their dogs.
Jamie has an unhealthy obsession with this volunteer group and views them as amateurish. Of course when an agency exists close by that does what you do for free (find missing dogs) it’s only natural to feel some resentment.
Jamie often whines about MDM on his Facebook page:
He is very impulsive and acts unprofessionally with clients. We showed you yesterday that two of the women he is suing alongside me are former customers who had the nerve to complain that they paid him money and were told their dogs were dead, when in fact the dogs were alive. Here’s a message he sent another angry customer 4 years ago whose dog was found dead:
As you can see, there are no shortage of people online who have negative things to say about Jamie’s business and professionalism.
In 2017 a couple hired Jamie to find their missing dog. According to a text message between the client and a volunteer for MDM (who Jamie is suing) the woman’s husband found the dog dead in the woods.
MDM wrote that the dog had been found dead and like a vindictive school girl Jamie took to Facebook to mock MDM, calling them “fiction writers” because he thought they were making it look like they found the dog.
Clearly that’s not what they were doing, and this further illustrates the obsession this man has with this great voluntary organization.
Let’s look at what he’s suing these 10 women for.
The complaint lists his experience as a hunter, dog trainer, and private investigator, before forming his dog tracking company.
He claims that prior to these women saying critical things about his business on the Internet his track record was “unblemished.” Evidently he then believes that people aren’t allowed to publicly criticize his business, even customers, because it will affect his reputation.
Defendant 1 – Karen Monteiro
The MDM volunteer is being sued because she opined that he is a “scam artist” who “preys on people desperately looking for lost pets.” She’s also called him dishonest, untrustworthy, and fraudulent.
These statements cannot be considered defamatory because they are opinion. A good lawyer knows that, and I suspect Jamie’s attorney is a good attorney. But lawyers often take cases they know they have no chance of winning if their clients are willing to pay. As DeAngelo Barksdale once said, “Money be green.”
Karen is one of the people being sued because she commented underneath Manch’s post on our Facebook page:
So whatever you do, DO NOT exercise your First Amendment rights to free speech on our page if you have negative things to say about the way in which Jamie Genereux conducts business. And please, DO NOT leave negative reviews on PetTrackers Facebook page either.
Defendant #2 – Sheila Graham
Sheila is another volunteer who finds missing dogs. She’s being sued for comments she left on her own Facebook page, calling Jamie Genereux a “troll” who “stages photo ops” aimed at misleading the public (something several people have alleged).
All of this is opinion and protected speech. It’s a legitimate complaint by a woman who feels as if she does his job better than him. Jamie Genereux believes that no one should be allowed to voice negative opinions about his business on the Internet.
Defendant #3 – Stefani Lydon-Tremouliaris
Stefani called Jamie a “scammer,” a “scam artist,” and said he “seeks to get rich” off of vulnerable pet owners who “drain their savings” to pay for his services. She also compared him to an ambulance chasing attorney, and compared MDM’s free services to his charged services.
Again, this is all opinion, and constitutionally protected speech. Anyone with a basic background in history understands that. The fact that his attorney would accept money from Jamie to pursue this case seems rather unethical in my opinion. Almost as unethical as accepting money from a client and telling them their dog is dead when the dog is actually alive.
Defendant #4 – Victoria Callahan
Victoria is a MDM volunteer who is being sued for liking a comment on Facebook. I’m not even kidding either. A man who is NOT being sued commented that Jamie Genereux should be in jail and she simply liked the comment. A screenshot of the likes is submitted as evidence in the lawsuit. She also has called him a “liar,” “dishonest,” “untrustworthy,” and “fraudulent,” particularly in regards to the Mayo’s being told their dog was in the pond in Wrentham.
Defendant #5 – Kristin Ericson
Kristin is the President of MDM, and she was the other woman who “liked” the comment about Jamie belonging in jail, which she is being sued for, along with a Facebook post she made two years ago in which she opined that MDM does what Jamie does for free.
Again, these are her opinions, and she’s allowed to have them.
Defendant #6 – Donna Hurley
Donna is a MDM volunteer who is being sued for one singular comment she left under Manch’s Facebook post in which she called Genereux a “sociopath” and a “fraud.”
Both of those are opinions. And quite frankly I can’t think of a more appropriate word to call someone who would file a 156 page lawsuit against 11 people because they criticized his business practices on Facebook.
Defendant #7 – Kathy LeBlanc
Kathy is one of the most vocal and consistent critic, and has been battling with Jamie online for years. Amongst other things, he is suing her for calling him a “predator” with a “personality disorder,” both of which are opinions and protected speech. In particular she was upset when Jamie got credit on WBZ for finding a dog named Gigi.
On March 10, 2018, Kathy openly complained about a photo Jamie posed for, holding a missing dog that had been found. In her opinion, and in the opinion of most unbiased people looking at the image, he was trying to make it look like he found the dog, when in fact he did not. And she had the receipts to prove that two kids found the dog in a neighbor’s yard.
Does this look like a guy who is trying to make it look like he found a dog that a bunch of untrained children actually found?
I think so, and so does Kathy LeBlanc. Cool cammo though.
Whether or not it was Ocean State Ace Ventura’s intention to make it look like he found yet another missing pet, his friends on Facebook sure thought that he did, and he made no effort to correct them when they heaped praise on him.
His expertise in dog tracking evidently couldn’t be used to find the dog just a couple houses down from the owner’s house.
When someone pointed out that it was 2 kids who found the dog Jamie finally admitted that it wasn’t him who found the dog. He merely picked the dog up and posed for a picture when it attempted to run away again.
Jamie must monitor this woman’s page, because although she didn’t tag him in her post he still found his way over there to do battle with her:
Other people caught on to the fact that Jamie was clearly dodging the fact that the image he shared on his Facebook page made it look like he found the dog.
Jamie responded by going on a tirade about missing dogs he had found, as if that somehow changes the fact that the image he posted was an intentional misrepresentation of what actually transpired.
Defendant #8 – Dawn Titus-Bankert
Dawn is one of 2 former customers Jamie is suing because they felt ripped off by him and had the nerve to say so publicly after giving him their hard earned money. She’s been going HARD after him since 2014 when her dog Kimber disappeared and she hired Jamie to find him. According to her Jamie told her that Kimber was dead twice, but Kimber ended up showing up alive and well. She feels personally victimized by him, and now Jamie is victimizing her all over again by making her hire an attorney to defend her constitutionally protected rights to free speech. She called him a “con artist” who “rips people off when they’re vulnerable,” and as a former client she is allowed to feel this way and express it in writing.
Defendant #9 – Melinda Lawrence
Melinda is the second former client Jamie is suing for one singular comment she left about her personal experience with him underneath Manch’s blog in August on our Facebook page. She, like many others, referred to him as a fraud, but she has no association with MDM.
(You made the lawsuit Angelo! You’re officially Turtleboy famous, but not in a bad way!)
Defendant #10 – Judith Wilson
Judith is actually being sued for a comment that Defendant #1 Karen Monteiro made, that Jamie was “being investigated in the Knox case.” Karen never said who was investigating him, which means the comment isn’t libelous. Judith did however accuse Jamie of falsely claiming to have found another animal named Lyoness.
According to Jamie’s lawsuit he is suffering from “emotional distress’ because people criticized his business methods, and wants us to pay his attorney’s fees, which are probably sky high considering the complaint is 156 pages long.
He also opined that MDM is trying to “eliminate” him as a “competitor” and destroy his ability to make a living.
Except….that’s exactly what capitalism is. If someone can offer the same service you can for less money (free in this case), then your business isn’t much of a business after all. Either way, if your business is so weak that it can be damaged by former customers leaving legitimate complaints in Facebook comments sections then perhaps your business has more glaring issues to worry about. And if he’s struggling so much then how can he afford to pay for this ridiculous lawsuit?
If Jamie hadn’t filed this lawsuit I would have no idea who he was. I’d never mention his name again, and Manch is gone so he doesn’t have to worry about her. He could’ve faded into obscurity, but instead he chose to do this, so here we are.
If you’d like to contribute to our legal fund to help defeat this Fascist trying to silence our speech, we greatly appreciate any contributions you’d like to make to the turtle fund.
Hello Turtle Riders. As you know if you follow Turtleboy we are constantly getting censored and banned by Facebook for what are clearly not violations of their terms of service. Twitter has done the same, and trolls mass reported our blog to Google AdSense thousands of times, leading to demonitization. We can get by and survive, but we could really use your help. Please consider donating by hitting the PayPal button above if you’d like support free speech and what we do in the face of Silicon Valley censorship. Or just buy our award winning book about the dangers of censorship and rise of Turtleboy: