Here’s another one for the history books….
35 year old Greg Fultz, is pisssed off. Not because he got trapped into having a baby he didn’t want (FYI fellas… oral sex is NOT a contraceptive these days) but because his ex-girlfriend aborted his child.
He posts a giant billboard bearing his image cradling what appears to be the the black silhouette of a child in his arms, with the following words:
“This Would Have Been a Picture of My 2-Month Old Baby If the Mother Had Decided To Not KILL Our Child!”
The larger than life sign was posted last month, right next to the main road in their hometown of Alamogordo, New Mexico.
Fultz’s ex-girlfriend, Nani Lawrence, saw the billboard and was devastated. The woman’s friends all say she had a miscarriage, not an abortion, according to a report in the Albuquerque Journal.
But Fultz says he’s telling the truth…
Lawrence has taken him to court claiming harassment and violation of privacy. Now the New Mexico man is fighting a court battle over what he says is a free speech battle.
The woman’s lawyer said she had not discussed the pregnancy with her client. But for Ellen Jessen, whether her client had a miscarriage or an abortion is not the point. The central issue is her client’s privacy and the fact that the billboard has caused severe emotional distress, Jessen said.
“Her private life is not a matter of public interest,” she told the Alamogordo Daily News.
Jessen says her client’s ex-boyfriend has crossed the line.
“Nobody is stopping him from talking about father’s rights. … but a person can’t invade someone’s private life.
Last Friday, county domestic violence court officials ordered that the sign be taken down by June 16 but Fultz is fighting the order on the basis of ‘Free Speech” and hopes to take the case all to the Supreme Court.
“As distasteful and offensive as the sign may be to some, for over 200 years in this country the First Amendment protects distasteful and offensive speech,” says Fultz’s lawyer, Todd Holmes.
“My argument is what Fultz said is the truth,” he said.
Lawrence’s lawyer, Ellen Jessen, said her client had a miscarriage, not an abortion, and that the billboard is an unlawful invasion of privacy.
“I think Fultz’s right to free speech ends where Nani Lawrence’s right to privacy begins. … Freedom of speech is not absolute,” she said.
Read more about this case HERE…
Should a man (or woman) have the right to put their ex’s personal business on blast?