{"id":"court_ctb_478_1","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":478,"sub_number":1,"doc_type":"EXHIBIT","filed_date":"2022-06-20","title":"EXHIBIT A FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/2018 02:14 PM** INDEX NO. 159636/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"# **EXHIBIT A**\n\n# **FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/2018 02:14 PM** INDEX NO. 159636/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 2 of 25\n\n| NEW<br>YORK<br>SUPREME<br>COURT<br>OF<br>STATE<br>OF<br>THE<br>NEW<br>COUNTY<br>YORK<br>OF                                                     |                                             |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------|\n| -------------------------------------------------------------------<br>WATSON\"<br>(\"<br>MENG<br>WEICAN<br>and<br>BOXUN,<br>(\"WATSON\")<br>INC., | X<br>:<br>Index<br>No.:<br>159636/2017<br>: |\n| Plaintiff,                                                                                                                                     | :                                           |\n| against<br>-<br>-                                                                                                                              | :<br>AMENDED<br>VERIFIED                    |\n| GUO<br>WENGUI<br>MILES<br>a/k/a<br>KWOK,                                                                                                       | COMPLAINT<br>:                              |\n| Defendant                                                                                                                                      | :<br>:                                      |\n| -------------------------------------------------------------------                                                                            | X                                           |\n\n(\" Watson\" Plaintiffs Weican (\"Watson\") Meng (\"Meng\") and Boxun Inc. (\"Boxun\") (collectively, \"Plaintiffs\" \"Plaintiffs\") by their attorneys Arkin Solbakken LLP, as and for their complaint against defendant Guo Wengui, a/k/a Miles Kwok (\"Guo\"), hereby state as follows:\n\n### PRELIMINARY STATEMENT\n\n1. This is an action for injunctive relief and monetary damages arising out of Guo's repeated acts of defamation committed against Plaintiffs.\n\n2. Guo's conduct was knowing, malicious, willful and wanton and/or showed a reckless disregard for Plaintiffs' rights and has caused, and will continue to cause, Plaintiffs disgrace, humiliation, and shame, permanent harm to their professional reputations and to the personal reputation of Meng, and severe mental anguish and emotional distress to Meng.\n\n3. Unhappy with the truthful and factual reporting by Plaintiffs about him, Guo has repeatedly published fabricated, false, and offensive statements about Meng on social medial platforms such as Twitter and websites such as YouTube, asserting that he is a spy, a special agent of the People's Republic of China (\"PRC\"), and that he has engaged in criminal acts that will lead to prosecution.\n\n4. Similarly, Guo has repeatedly published, false, and offensive statements about Boxun on Twitter and YouTube, asserting that Boxun is a paid agent of the PRC, or otherwise under the control of the PRC government, and falsely claiming that Boxun also engaged in criminal acts.\n\n5. Guo has also engaged in intentional acts designed to harass and intimidate Meng, includingsendingagents/representatives to Meng's home to physicallyconfront him.\n\n### JURISDICTION AND VENUE\n\n6. Pursuant to CPLR 301 and CPLR 302, this Court has jurisdiction over Guo because he is a resident of, and regularly conducts business in, New York County and New York State.\n\n7. Pursuant to CPLR 503(a), venue is proper because Guo resides in New York County and has been actively publishing defamatory statements from his residence in this County.\n\n### THE PARTIES\n\n8. Meng is the founder and a contributing writer of Boxun News (htt), a United States-based independent media outlet located at 3370 Prince Street, Suite 803, Flushing, New York 11354.\n\n9. Meng is a graduate of the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University, having received his MBA in 2005.\n\n10. Thereafter, Meng was named a John S. Knight Journalism Fellow at Stanford Universityin 2008 and 2009.\n\n11. Meng maintains an active Twitter account (@wmeng8) and is often referred to, and known as, \"Wei Shi\" by his followers there and at Boxun.\n\n12. Boxun Inc. (collectively, with Boxun News, \"Boxun\"), Boxun News's corporate entity, is incorporated in New York.\n\n13. Boxun prides itself on being an independent voice that sheds light on the often opaque world of the PRC.\n\n14. Its mission includes, but is not limited to, reporting on the inner workings of the secretive government of the PRC and publishing revelations about human rights violations in that country.\n\n15. Boxun utilizes the services of journalists, and at times non-journalists, who are, in most instances, PRC nationals with intimate, personal knowledge of the occurrences about which they report.\n\n16. Insofar as Plaintiffs' success as a functioning news service is premised upon their independence from the PRC government and the PRC's state-run media, the allegations set forth in detail below, in which Guo falsely claims that the PRC has control over Plaintiffs, are highly damaging to Plaintiffs' professional reputations.\n\n17. Defendant Guo is a PRC national and a real estate billionaire, residing at 781 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York.\n\n18. Upon information and belief, Guo has lived at 781 Fifth Avenue since March 6, 2015.\n\n19. Guo uses aliases and maintains at least one active Twitter account, under the name Miles Kwok (@KwokMiles).\n\n20. Guo has carefully cultivated an image of himself as a cultured political dissident who stands up to - and exposes rampant corruption within - the tyrannical government of the PRC.\n\n21. This public persona, however, is a smokescreen, largely facilitated by his considerable personal wealth and prominent connections in the West.\n\n22. In fact, this crafted fiction serves not only to satisfy Guo's ego and the egos of those who affiliate with him; it further provides Guo with a means to mask the campaign of intimidation and terror he unleashed upon those few of his employees who dare not submit themselves entirely to his domination and to the multitude of business partners who have been forced to institute multiple litigations against him because of his failure to live up to his professional and business commitments.\n\n### DEFENDANT'S DEFAMATION OF PLAINTIFFS\n\n23. From late 2014 to 2016, Plaintiffs published a number of articles about Guo indicating that he was working in close coordination with, and/or at the behest of, the government of the PRC, notwithstandinghis public pronouncements against it.\n\n24. For example, in December 2014, Boxun published several reports after interviewing a business man from China who claimed to have been wronged by Guo.\n\n25. The interviewee indicated that Guo had used his connections at the PRC's Ministryof State Securityto threaten him,and to permit Guo to benefit illegally.\n\n26. Guo was very upset that these facts about him had been publicly revealed.\n\n27. As a result, Guo embarked on a full-throated campaign to discredit Plaintiffs usingthreats, intimidation and defamation.\n\n28. In fact, upon information and belief, Guo's actions, and his campaign to defame Mengand Boxun were in furtherance of his own media business.\n\n29. Guo's business plan, a copy of which Meng obtained from a Twitter posting (@YvetteWong0 on 09/14/2017), for a media venture called \"Democracy TV\" (a Guo Global\n\n# **FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/2018 02:14 PM** INDEX NO. 159636/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 6 of 25\n\nMedia Group project) asserted that in 2017, \"MGM will make every step forward to sink the Boxun, while phasing out the media under Watson's [Meng's] control.\" control.\"\n\n30. Pursuant to this venture, Guo would \"maintain 100% complete discretion to control the messaging, and Guo Global Media Group will maintain an exclusive right to air Guo's content.\"\n\n31. As discussed in detail below, on multiple occasions, Guo took to Twitter and YouTube, and publicly made outrageous and utterly baseless assertions against Plaintiffs with the sole intent of undermining Meng's professional and personal integrity, and to discredit Plaintiffs' Plainti journalistic independence and integrity.\n\n32. Meng 0 is commonly known as \"Wei Shi\" byJ Boxun's readers, sponsors, r and byJ followers critical of the PRC government. Each of Guo's statements detailed below refers to \"Wei Shi,\" a name directly associated to Meng.\n\n### A. Guo's Defamatory Statements Posted on Twitter\n\n33. Upon information and belief, Guo has more than 524,000 followers on Twitter.\n\n34. On February 17, 2017, Guo asserted on Twitter: \"@wmeng8 Mr. Weishi, how dare you lie with your eyes open, netizens know how to read! Please do not make such stupid mistakes to think you are smarter than the netizens! You can present the evidences I have mentioned, you said I love money, I am an entrepreneur, so why wouldn't I love money, however, I am not like you who would betray friends and take advantage of other's trust to bully those who are weak and help those who are evil in order to earn ill-gotten money! You collected money from three sides from your falsified report about me, you are so evil, as evil as the bad Disciplinarum Committee + the Public Security!\"\n\n# **FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/2018 02:14 PM** INDEX NO. 159636/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 7 of 25\n\n35. On February 17, 2017, Guo asserted on Twitter, \"@ZhaoMingObserve\n\n@wmeng8 You upheld the justice for me and they bullied you, how could I simply watch and not do anything, that's not the style for Guo Wengui. In order to thank you for upholding the justice for me today, please disclose on my behalf some evidence on Mr. Weishi lurking around and taking money! Whatever we do, we have to be sensible and reasonable at the same time, and we also go byevidence!\"\n\n36. On February 22, 2017, Guo asserted on Twitter, \"Dear netizens: I believe the netizens have seen the synthetic video of \"Triple Evilness\" of Guo Wengui. It is proved from an official and reliable channel that the source of the video is Fu Zhenghua, who directly ordered the video to be broadcasted. Weishi and Xinuo from overseas are directly under the orders from the First Bureau and Fu Zhenghua with the promise of great benefits. Get rid of Mingjing and Guo Wengui and give the overseas Chinese media market to Weishi, and offer them an enormous sum of money for support in addition to the original annual appropriations. As I did not fully follow their control and mentioned members and the standing committee of the Poliburo, the Special Investigation Team came to my company again in the last 48 hours for the so-called arraignment and evidence collection from the parties involved. It was said the above request is to convict Guo Wengui and his son at any cost. An international arrest warrant can only be issued if they are convicted.\"\n\n37. The First Bureau refers to the Ministry of Public Security, which is the PRC's principal police and security authority and the government agency that exercises oversight over law enforcement.\n\n38. Fu Zhenghua is a PRC public security official who served as Deputy Minister of Public Security.\n\n# **FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/2018 02:14 PM** INDEX NO. 159636/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 8 of 25\n\n39. On February 22, 2017, Guo asserted on Twitter, \"@ZhaoMingObserve In order to thank the netizens for your indescribable support that has touched me so much: Let me break two news as my little reward to you[.] The person who is pixelated in the photo is the older brother of the former president of the Peking University, he is a great guy, as it only has the photo of Li You, me and us visiting Jiuzhaigou, I knew as soon as Boxun published the photo on their website that Li You and his shareholders from the Standing Committee of the Politburo bought over Weishi from Boxun.\"\n\n40. On March 6, 2017, Guo asserted on Twitter that \"Today is a great day: I read this objective and excellent article written by Mr. Tang Baiqiao and I was very touched. This is the power, attraction, warmth of the Tweeter world. Wengui is sincerely grateful to Mr. Tang, and Weishi, Xinuo and his boss must be brought for justice. Their threats and evil forces to the domestic and overseas Chinese must be eradicated, and everythinghas just begun. It must.\"\n\n41. On March 21, 2017, Guo asserted on Twitter that \"@wenyunchao Wengui is here to gamble for once with the supporters of Weishi: both Mr. Weishi and Mr. Xinuo will be sued by the prosecutor for offence of extortion by blackmail and tax evasion. I am simply asking you to drink the entire bottle at my victory banquet in New York for my grass root honesty and bravery. If they can get away by the end of 2017, I will invite them to my banquet for a bottle of drinks at the Spring Festival of 2018 and I will also give each one one million U.S. Dollars as a compensation. Who would like to sign up?\"\n\n42. On October 3, 2017, Guo asserted on Twitter that \"Everyone please be careful that this is a phishing email. It's fake... Weishi and B Wu and Xinuo did it!\"\n\n43. Upon information and belief, Guo made additional statements regarding Meng and Boxun on Twitter that have since been deleted from Guo's Twitter account.\n\n44. Insofar as Boxun's success as a functioning news service is premised upon its independence from the PRC government and all other government agencies, the false statements that Meng works with the government of the PRC are highly damaging to Meng's reputation and thus are defamatory per se.\n\n45. Also, Guo's false statements that Plaintiffs' purportedly committed a crime are also defamatory per se.\n\n### B. Guo's Defamatory Statements on YouTube\n\n46. Guo also made statements posted on YouTube concerningPlaintiffs.\n\n47. On May 19, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"They are also very interesting, they provide me with information immediately, saying that Weishi from Boxun is very bad. They said he has two younger brothers, his real name is Meng Weican, from Hebei Province, and he has one younger brother called Meng Weisong, and let me see, yes Meng Weisong, and another younger brother called Meng Weikang (transliteration). At least four tweeter friends, whom I don't know completely, said they have had dealings with his family before, which was to (illegible) and to (illegible), and they have connections with various departments.\"\n\n48. On May 20, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"I was very happy to see Weishi sent me a message after he saw my TV announcement and it was my first time to see Mr. Weishi getting so upset. He said I won't let you off easy if you direct against my family. However, I am very happy today because I finally see my opponent feeling the pain because of his family. I am not perverted, but I am very happy as I have found your pain spot. Don't your family let you feel the pain? I can also learn from your partners and traitors. Didn't you get a new task in Hong Kong? Didn't you say to me yesterday \"Guo Wengui, let's see who's going to\n\n### **FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/2018 02:14 PM** INDEX NO. 159636/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 10 of 25\n\nget locked up first\"? That's right, let's see who's going to get locked up first. Next, as for your younger brothers and your family, you will see how I will handle them. Weishi you see, everything is easy as long you have a pain spot. Let's see who's going to get locked up first, Weishi. Mr. Weishi, you accepted your task in Hong Kong, and you have such delusion, you and the traitors and rogues are like twins who can have sufficient reasons to justify your evil doingand actions.\"\n\n49. On June 13, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"And there is Weishi from Boxun, Weishi from Boxun, plus, mostly importantly, the so-called systematic control behind the scenes from the traitors in domestic China, which is very very scary.\"\n\n50. On June 28, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"I don't even want to mention Boxun anymore, Boxun will be arrested by the U.S. Government for sure, let's wait and see and I am so anxiously looking forward to it. Even though, there are still people supporting it, for those who support it should know what end you will come to. They work for the Chinese government; this has already been acknowledged unanimously by the U.S. Government officials.\"\n\n51. On July 8, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"Your two younger brothers are collecting money in Beijing, for everything you have done, Weishi, I will certainly make you pay! You will find out very soon, I had a bet with you. Let's see where you will go at the end of the year.\"\n\n52. On October 10, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"It was very strange yesterday, yesterday morning, which is at night in Beijing the day before, Maosheng's Jin Zhizheng contacted me for information on the family members of Weishi and Xinuo, including a few buddies of Weishi raking in money in China. I was very shocked, I thought it wasn't real, I\n\n## **FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/2018 02:14 PM** INDEX NO. 159636/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 11 of 25\n\nthen went home to call to verify and found it was true. Very interesting, and then also yesterday, afew U.S. journalists called me to verify with me that they heard Hu Jingtao and Wen Jiabao were arrested. I asked if they saw it on Boxun and they said yes. I told them every information on that website is 100% fake. It is so disastrous. Can you believe Boxun actually said that Hu Jingtao and Wen Jiabao were arrested?!\"\n\n53. The term \"Jin Zhizheng\" means \"Economic Investigator of a Province,\" which is aSection of the Ministryof Public Securitydescribed above.\n\n54. On July 17, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"Therefore, Weishi will certainly spend the rest of his life in jail. This is for sure and I can say it responsibly. Whatever you say doesn't matter as they have already finished with their investigation.\"\n\n55. On August 5, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"Comparatively, Weishi from Boxun would be a piece of garbage, that guy could sell his mother for one hundred dollars, that Weishi, he could really sell his mother for one hundred dollars, he would take a deep breath as soon as he smells money, he can't help it, he is different. Therefore, knowing Weishi is a special agent and Xinuo is a special agent, but nobody does anything, now it feels like everyone is a special agent.\"\n\n56. On August 21, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"Boxun, and Weishi, Xinuo, and Toad Li are an intelligence organization in the U.S., can they deceive any longer? Can't the U.S. Government see it? How much longer can they stay blind?! Therefore, as you can see, how many spies and special agents will be caught by Wengui's magic mirror, this is so interesting.\"\n\n### **FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/2018 02:14 PM** INDEX NO. 159636/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 12 of 25\n\n57. On August 28, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"Haemorrhoid Xia, Weishi, Xinuo, they phish blatantly and collect money, they violate the law and commit crimes, why don't quote that?\"\n\n58. On September 4, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"Then Weishi, Xinuo are criminals and wanted men!\"\n\n59. On September 6, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"Got away from the wild swine herd and wild dog pack of Toad Li Weidong, and Xinuo, Weishi, Haemorrhoid Xia of Xia Yeliang, as well as traitors like Sun Lijun and MengJianzhu.\"\n\n60. On September 10, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"Therefore, Li Weidong, the Toad Li, and people such as Weishi and Xinuo, as well as Haemorrhoid Zhang and Haemorrhoid Xia are all the results of \"Lan-Jin-Huang [Blue/Gold/Yellow].\"\n\n61. \"Operation Blue/Gold/Yellow\" is a term Guo uses to describe the PRC's tactics totarget individuals - through bribes, blackmail and other nefarious means - and to coerce them towork for the PRC government.\n\n62. On September 10, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"Just like Haemorrhoid Xia, Haemorrhoid Zhang, Weishi, Xinuo, Toad Li Weidong, and this He Qinlian, and a bunch of these things, all of these will be wiped out like flying ashes. Let these people be agreat gift to us, they will let us see these silent forces are threatening our pursuit of democracy and the legal system.\"\n\n63. On September 19, 2017, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"At the downstream, there are Weishi and Xinuo from Boxun as well as Toad Li Weidong operating on the outside with a public Tweeter account and a fake Wang Yanping identity, with many hackers attacking you and everyone at Mingjing.\"\n\n### **FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/2018 02:14 PM** INDEX NO. 159636/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 13 of 25\n\n64. On February 4, 2018, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"Can I go to Boxun? Of course I cannot go to Boxun, otherwise I will be caught if I go to Boxun, I would die sooner or later without knowing it.\"\n\n65. Guo continues, later in that YouTube video \"Chen Jun, you now need to answer the following questions: What is your relation with Weishi? What is your relation with Xinuo and what is your relation with Yuan Jianbin? Have you plotted with them to frame Guo Wengui? ...When When we look back, all of what you have said are rumors spreaded by Yuan Jianbin, Weishi, Wu Zhengand the Communist Party.\"\n\n66. Guo further states in that February 4, 2018 video, again referring to Chen Jun, that \"However, if he does not tell the truth but behaves like people such as Boxun, Weishi, Li Weidong, or Ye Liang, then we would have to wait and see...\"\n\n67. On February 10, 2018, Guo stated in a YouTube video that \"Everyone can see there is something common about Chen Jun, Yuan Jianbin, Weishi, Xinuo, Wu Zheng: that is they can lie without blinking their eyes. They think everyone else in this world has zero brain, it is because they got away with their lies each time, that's the reason they can be so ignorant and arrogant...Yuan Jianbin, Weishi, Xinuo, and Chen Jun scammed whom for money? It was their friends' money, while Wu Zheng scammed the government for money and Jack Ma stealed money from the government.\"\n\n68. Insofar as Plaintiffs' success as a functioning news service is premised upon its independence from the PRC government and all other government agencies, these allegations are highly damaging to Plaintiffs' professional reputation and thus are defamatory per se.\n\n### C. Guo's Other Acts of Harassment and Intimidation\n\n69. In addition to Guo's very public defamatory statements about Plaintiffs, Guo undertook an intentional campaign of harassment and intimidation against Meng personally, in an effort to cause him emotional distress and to further derail Plaintiffs' business efforts.\n\n70. As discussed herein, Guo's extreme and outrageous actions, through his agents, have caused Meng severe emotional distress.\n\n71. On March 3, 2017, Guo sent three men to a Boxun employee's home in Flushing, New York.\n\n72. At approximately 6:40 p.m. that day, the men knocked on the door of the Boxun employee's home.\n\n73. The employee's landlady answered the door, but she refused to open it.\n\n74. In response, the men kicked the door.\n\n75. The employee's landlady threatened to call the police and the three men left.\n\n76. The incident left the employee's landlady in distress and physically ill.\n\n77. At 9:40 p.m. that same day, Meng's surveillance camera recorded a black car that had gone to his home.\n\n78. The black car's visiting his home was unusual for Meng's neighborhood particularly at this time of evening.\n\n79. The next day, on March 4, 2017, Guo admitted on Twitter that the harassment Meng and his employee experienced were at Guo's direction: \"Good morning Mr. Weishi: You originally tried to scare me by either trying to reach out to the prosecutors, or FBI, and then you wanted to file a lawsuit...Even half of the cows in Mongolia are scared to death by you... and your actions? Wengui can't wait any longer as I am ready to take actions...my buddies didn't didn'\n\n### **FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/2018 02:14 PM** INDEX NO. 159636/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 15 of 25\n\nscare you enough for you to pee in your pants yesterday, did they? These prosecutors and police will accompany you to jail, you better reach out to your organization in Beijing for help! Mr. Weishi! Everything has just begun!\"\n\n80. With this statement, Guo posted four pictures depicting several men standing in front of a police vehicle.\n\n81. Upon information and belief, the men depicted in the pictures are police offers or otherwise associated with law enforcement.\n\n82. Later that same day, Guo issued Meng a challenge on Twitter: \"Mr. Weishi crawled out of the rat hole. Weren't (you) scared to death when (I) came? The address you gave me is fake, you were so scared that you went into hiding yesterday. You didn't even have the gut to accept the indictment and the investigation notice and you are still talking nonsense here, and now you are beginning to mention my passport. If you have the gut, let's let' bring our passports to a live broadcast at Mingjing. Or I can meet you anywhere you want today! Would you dare? Take a couple of walks?\"\n\n83. Meng, hoping to end Guo's harassment and intimidation tactics against him, accepted Guo's offer to meet in person.\n\n84. On March 4, 2017 at approximately 4 p.m., Meng met Guo at the Sheraton Hotel inFlushing, New York.\n\n85. Guo was accompanied by more than ten individuals that appeared to be bodyguards, a lawyer and assistants.\n\n86. At the meeting, Meng told Guo and his agents that they should not have sent people to the Boxun employee's home and that they should not have kicked his door.\n\n87. In response, Guo told Meng that the men he sent to the Boxun employee's home were police officers (intimating that he had hired the officers to do his work) and that they \"can go to anybody's home.\"\n\n88. Guo stated that he instructed the men to kick the door when the employee's landladywould not open it.\n\n89. Upon information and belief, Guo again ordered his agents, some or all of whom were carrying guns, to harass Meng in the early morning and late night.\n\n90. Meng's surveillance cameras captured Guo's agents returning to Meng's home several times.\n\n91. On March 6, 2017, Guo's agents followed Meng to a donut store near Plaintiffs' office.\n\n92. During this incident, Guo's agents took pictures of Meng and Meng's car, which were posted on Twitter (@YvetteWong0 on 8/18/2017).\n\n93. On March 7, 2017, Guo's agents followed Meng for over forty miles from his home to Boxun's office. Mengreported this incident to police.\n\n94. That same day, at approximately 10:30 p.m., Meng observed an unknown individual in a white car watchingMeng's home.\n\n95. Concerned for his safety, Meng called the police.\n\n96. After investigating, the police indicated that the individual outside his home had been hired to surveil Meng's home.\n\n97. The next day, in the morning of March 8, 2017, Meng observed that the white sedan that was parked outside his home had been replaced by a van with an individual who was .also surveilling Meng's home.\n\n98. When Meng photographed the van in front of his home, the van quickly drove away. The van later returned to the same location.\n\n99. Upon information and belief, Guo hired these individuals to surveil Meng's home infurtherance of his harassment and intimidation campaign.\n\n100. On May 8, 2017, Meng learned that Guo's agents had taken Meng's confidential personal and business bank information, including a record of his bank transactions.\n\n101. Guo published Meng's bank account information on Twitter and YouTube.\n\n102. More recently, Guo has also attempted to enlist third parties to participate in his attacks on Meng.\n\n103. Specifically, on multiple occasions in October 2017, Guo directed his agents and/or representatives, including, but not limited to, an individual named Guo Baosheng, to physically approach and verbally communicate with friends, colleagues and business associates of Meng, including, but not limited to, an individual named Yuan Jianbin.\n\n104. Guo's agents and representatives offered Meng's friends, colleagues and business associates money and other enticements to distance themselves from Meng and to publicly state negative things about Meng, thereby further defaming him.\n\n105. Some of these efforts have been unsuccessful because of the loyalty to Meng shown byhis friends, colleagues and business associates.\n\n106. However, in other instances, these efforts were successful, including, but not limited to, Zhao Yan, Ge Lifang and Ai Furong, all of whom have betrayed Meng and Boxun by making negative public statements about them at the behest of Guo.\n\n107. Guo's acts of physical and emotional intimidation - along with his defamatory statements detailed herein - have caused severe emotional distress to Meng.\n\n108. Guo's interference with Meng's personal and professional relationships has contributed to and further exacerbated his emotional distress.\n\n### FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Defamation Per Se)\n\n109. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference all preceding and succeeding paragraphs as if fullyset forth herein at length.\n\n110. Through postings to social media accounts, websites, and various other writings aforesaid, Guo has falsely and repeatedly claimed, among other things, that Meng is a paid agent of the government of the PRC, or otherwise under the control of that country's government and/or intelligence service, and that he engaged in criminal acts.\n\n111. These statements have been read by countless individuals.\n\n112. These repeated false statements have damaged Meng's reputation and caused manyindividuals to doubt Meng's independence as a journalist.\n\n113. These statements have damaged Meng's reputation among a large number of people, and caused them to associate Plaintiffs with bad journalism, false reporting and conflicted motivations.\n\n114. Guo knows that these statements are false, or at the very least, he has made these statements with reckless disregard for their truthfulness.\n\n115. Guo has no authorization to make these false statements nor are they protected by any privilege.\n\n116. Guo made these statements with the intent to damage Meng, his reputation and his business, and to induce third parties not to do business with him, particularly by ceasing to consume the independent journalism provided by Boxun.\n\n![](_page_18_Picture_0.jpeg)\n\n117. Meng has suffered extensive damages as a direct result of these false statements by Defendant, and will continue to suffer irreparable harm as a result of such violations of law for which there is no adequate remedy at law.\n\n### SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (Defamation)\n\n118. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference all preceding and succeeding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein at length.\n\n119. Through social media accounts, websites, and various other writings, Guo has falsely and repeatedly claimed that Meng is a paid agent of the government of the PRC or otherwise under the control of that country's intelligence service, and that he engaged in criminal acts.\n\n120. These written statements have been read by countless individuals.\n\n121. Guo knows these statements are false, or at the very least, he has made these statements with reckless disregard for their truthfulness.\n\n122. Guo has neither authorization nor privilege to make such statements. Guo made these statements with the intent to damage Meng, his reputation, and his business, and to induce other parties to not conduct business with him.\n\n123. Meng has suffered extensive damages as described above, including but not limited to extreme emotional distress and injury to his personal and professional reputation, as a direct result of these false statements, and will continue to suffer irreparable harm as a result of such violations of law for which there is no adequate remedyat law.\n\n124. Through social media, websites and various other writings, Guo has falsely and repeatedly claimed that Boxun is a paid agent of the government of the PRC and that it engaged incriminal acts.\n\n# **FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/2018 02:14 PM** INDEX NO. 159636/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 20 of 25\n\n125. These written statements have been read by countless individuals.\n\n126. Guo knows these statements are false, or at the very least, he has made these statements with reckless disregard for their truthfulness. Guo has neither authorization nor privilege to make such statements. Guo made these statements with the intent to damage Boxun, its reputation, its business, and to induce other parties to not conduct business with it.\n\n127. Boxun has suffered extensive damages as described above, including but not limited to, lost revenue and injury to its professional reputation, as a direct result of these false statements, and will continue to suffer irreparable harm as a result of such violations of law for which there is no adequate remedyat law.\n\n### THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION (Trade Defamation/Injurious Falsehoods)\n\n128. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference all proceeding and succeeding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein at length.\n\n129. Through social media accounts, websites, and video statements, Guo has falsely and repeatedly claimed that Meng is a paid agent of the government of the PRC or otherwise under the control of that country's intelligence service, and that he engaged in criminal acts.\n\n130. Guo knows these statements are false, or at the very least he has made these statements with reckless disregard for their truthfulness. Guo has neither authorization nor privilege to make such statements. Guo made these statements with the intent to damage Meng, his reputation, and his business, and to induce other parties to not conduct business with Meng.\n\n131. These false statements have caused countless readers to question the integrity and authenticity of Meng and his work at Boxun.\n\n132. Further, these false statements have induced other parties, to not conduct business dealings with Meng.\n\n### **FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/2018 02:14 PM** INDEX NO. 159636/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 21 of 25\n\n133. Meng has suffered extensive damage as a direct result of these false statements, and will continue to suffer irreparable harm as a result of such violations of law for which there is no adequate remedyat law.\n\n134. Through social media accounts and video statements, Guo has falsely claimed that Boxun is a paid agent of the government of the PRC and that it engaged in criminal acts.\n\n135. These statements have been read and heard by countless individuals.\n\n136. Guo knows these statements are false, or at the very least, he has made these statements with reckless disregard for their truthfulness. Guo has neither authorization nor privilege to make such statements. Guo has made these statements with intent to damage Boxun, its reputation, its business, and to induce other parties to not conduct business with it.\n\n137. These false statements have induced countless individuals to no longer subscribe to Boxun as a news source.\n\n138. Further these false remarks have damaged business relationships for Boxun as a potential business partners, and caused them to question the legitimacy of the company and even terminate their relationship with Boxun.\n\n139. Boxun has suffered extensive damages as a direct result of these false statements, and will continue to suffer irreparable harm as a result of such violations of law for which there is no adequate remedyat law.\n\n### FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress)\n\n140. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference all preceding and succeeding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein at length.\n\n141. Through social media accounts, video statements, and writings aforesaid, Guo has falselyand repeatedlyclaimed that Mengis a paid agent of the government of the PRC or\n\notherwise under the control of that country's intelligence service, and that he engaged in criminal acts.\n\n142. These statements have been read, viewed, and heard by countless individuals.\n\n143. Guo knows these statements are false, or at the very least, he has made these statements with reckless disregard for their truthfulness. His repeated publishing of these false claims regardingMengconstitutes extreme and outrageous conduct.\n\n144. In addition, Guo engaged in intentional conduct to harass and intimidate Meng, including by sending his agents to follow Meng; surveil his home; and investigate Meng's personal and business bank transactions. Guo's campaign of harassment and intimidation against Meng constitutes extreme and outrageous conduct.\n\n145. In addition, Guo has engaged said third parties and paid them to (1) make false statements about Plaintiffs to Meng's friends and colleagues; (2) physically intimidate Meng; and (3) approach the home of Meng's employee and to attempt to intimidate that person.\n\n146. Guo has made these statements, and committed acts of intimidation through his representatives, with intent to cause severe emotional distress to Meng, or at the least, he has made these statements and committed acts of intimidation through his representatives whilst recklessly disregarding the substantial likelihood that these statements and actions would cause Mengsevere emotional distress.\n\n147. Directly, because of these false and outrageous statements and intentional actions, Meng has experienced at least the following: severe emotional distress, shame, anxiety, emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, and other non-pecuniary losses.\n\n148. As a result, Meng has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.\n\n# NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 23 of 25\n\n### FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Conspiracyto IntentionallyInflict Emotional Distress)\n\n**FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/2018 02:14 PM** INDEX NO. 159636/2017\n\n149. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference all preceding and succeeding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein at length.\n\n150. As set forth hereinabove, Guo has engaged in a scheme to harass, intimidate and defame Plaintiffs and therebycause Mengsevere emotional distress.\n\n151. Guo has conspired with third parties to facilitate and implement his nefarious scheme.\n\n152. For example, Guo has engaged said third parties and paid them to (1) make false statements about Plaintiffs to Meng's friends and colleagues; (2) follow Meng to work; (3) surveil and physically intimidate Meng; and (4) approach the home of Meng's employee and to attempt to intimidate that person.\n\n153. By directing these third parties to undertake this conduct, and by paying them to do so, Guo took an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.\n\n154. As a result of this conspiracy and this conduct, Meng has suffered severe emotional distress, shame, anxiety, emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life,and other non-pecuniarylosses as set forth hereinabove.\n\n155. As a result, Meng has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.\n\n![](_page_23_Picture_0.jpeg)\n\n### WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request entry of Judgment in their favor and against\n\nDefendants as follows:\n\n- (i) compensatory and punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial, but no less than \\$1 million;\n- (ii) enjoining Defendant and anyone acting or purporting to act on his behalf from making any of the false and defamatory statements set forth herein, or similar false and defamatorystatements involvingPlaintiffs;\n\n(iii) punitive damages;\n\n- (iv) the costs and expenses incurred in this action including attorneys' fees; and\n- (v) such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.\n\nDated: March 30, 2018\n\n### ARKIN SOLBAKKEN LLP\n\nAttorneys fo lya ntiffs By:\n\nLisa C. Solbakken, Esq. Robert C. Angelillo, Esq. 750 Lexington Avenue, 25\\* Floor New York, New York 10022 Tel: (212) 333-0200 Fax: (212)333-2350\n\n# **FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/2018 02:14 PM** INDEX NO. 159636/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 25 of 25\n\n### VERIFICATION\n\nSTATE OF S A/ 62 ) KW ) ss.: COUNTY OF g~ca L )\n\n(\" WATSON\" WEICAN (\"WATSON\")MENG, being dulysworn,deposes and says:\n\nI am the individual plaintiff in this matter. I have read the foregoing Complaint and know the contents thereof. The same are true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters that are therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and that as to those matters I believe them to be true.\n\n(\" Watson\" Weican (\"Watson\") Meng\n\nSwo@ worn to before me this 'f day of Marc 2018 o Pu to\n\nJOSEPH J. CLAYTON Notary Pubile, State of New York No. 01CL6252511 Qualified Commission Commission in Suffolk Expires County 12/05/201\\$\n\n12I05/20tg","body_zh":"附件A\n\n已提交：纽约县书记官 03/30/2018 02:14 PM 案号：159636/2017 NYSCEF 文件编号：6 NYSCEF 收件日期：04/13/2018 案件 22-50073 文件 478-1 提交日期 06/20/22 登记日期 06/20/22 22:20:51 第 2 页，共 25 页\n\n纽约州\n最高法院\n纽约县\n\n孟维参（Meng Weican，Watson）及博讯公司（Boxun, Inc.）　X\n：\n案号：159636/2017\n：\n原告，　：\n诉\n\n郭文贵（Guo Wengui，又名 Miles Kwok），　经修正的核证起诉状\n\n被告　：\n\n-------------------------------------------------------------------　X\n\n孟维参（Meng Weican，“Watson”）及博讯公司（Boxun, Inc.）（与博讯新闻（Boxun News）合称“博讯”）（以下统称“原告”），由其律师 Arkin Solbakken LLP，作为对被告郭文贵（Guo Wengui，又名 Miles Kwok，下称“郭”）提出的起诉，特此陈述如下：\n\n初步陈述\n\n1. 本案系因郭多次对原告实施诽谤行为而提起的禁令救济及金钱赔偿之诉。\n\n2. 郭的行为系明知、恶意、故意及肆意而为，和/或显示出对原告权利的鲁莽漠视，并已造成且将继续造成原告名誉受损、蒙受羞辱和耻辱、其职业声誉以及孟个人声誉的永久性损害，并给孟造成严重的精神痛苦和情绪困扰。\n\n3. 郭因不满原告对其进行真实且基于事实的报道，已多次在 Twitter 等社交媒体平台及 YouTube 等网站上发布关于孟的捏造、虚假及冒犯性言论，声称孟是一名间谍、中华人民共和国（People's Republic of China，下称“PRC”）的特工，并称其从事了将导致被起诉的犯罪行为。\n\n4. 同样，郭已多次在 Twitter 和 YouTube 上发布关于博讯的虚假及冒犯性言论，声称博讯是 PRC 的受薪代理人，或以其他方式受 PRC 政府控制，并虚假声称博讯也从事了犯罪行为。\n\n5. 郭还实施了旨在骚扰和恐吓孟的故意行为，包括派遣代理人/代表前往孟的住所与其进行身体对峙。\n\n管辖权及审判地\n\n6. 根据 CPLR 301 和 CPLR 302，本院对郭具有管辖权，因为其系纽约县及纽约州居民，并经常在纽约县及纽约州开展业务。\n\n7. 根据 CPLR 503(a)，审判地适格，因为郭居住于纽约县，并一直从其位于本县的住所积极发布诽谤性言论。\n\n当事人\n\n8. 孟是博讯新闻（Boxun News，htt）的创始人及撰稿人。博讯新闻是一家位于美国的独立媒体机构，地址为 3370 Prince Street, Suite 803, Flushing, New York 11354。\n\n9. 孟毕业于杜克大学福卡商学院（Fuqua School of Business at Duke University），于 2005 年获得 MBA 学位。\n\n10. 此后，孟于 2008 年和 2009 年获任斯坦福大学约翰·S·奈特新闻学研究员（John S. Knight Journalism Fellow at Stanford University）。\n\n11. 孟维持一个活跃的 Twitter 账户（@wmeng8），其在该平台及博讯的追随者常称其为、且知其为“魏石”。\n\n12. 博讯公司（Boxun Inc.）（与博讯新闻合称“博讯”）为博讯新闻的公司实体，系在纽约注册成立。\n\n13. 博讯以作为一个独立声音而自豪，该声音揭示了 PRC 往往不透明的世界。\n\n14. 其使命包括但不限于报道 PRC 秘密政府的内部运作，并披露该国侵犯人权的情况。\n\n15. 博讯使用记者的服务，有时亦使用非记者的服务；在大多数情况下，该等人员系对其所报道事件具有密切、个人了解的 PRC 国民。\n\n16. 鉴于原告作为一家正常运作的新闻服务机构之成功，以其独立于 PRC 政府及 PRC 国营媒体为前提，下文详细列明的指控——其中郭虚假声称 PRC 控制原告——对原告的职业声誉造成极大损害。\n\n17. 被告郭系 PRC 国民及房地产亿万富翁，居住于 781 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York。\n\n18. 根据所获信息及信念，郭自 March 6, 2015 起一直居住于 781 Fifth Avenue。\n\n19. 郭使用化名，并以 Miles Kwok（@KwokMiles）之名维持至少一个活跃的 Twitter 账户。\n\n20. 郭精心塑造其形象，称自己是一名有教养的政治异见人士，敢于对抗并揭露 PRC 专制政府内部猖獗的腐败。\n\n21. 然而，这一公众形象是一种烟幕，主要由其可观的个人财富及其在西方的重要关系所促成。\n\n22. 事实上，这一精心构建的虚构形象不仅满足了郭及与其关联者的虚荣心；其还为郭提供了一种手段，以掩盖其对少数不敢完全屈从于其支配的雇员所发动的恐吓和恐怖运动，以及掩盖众多因其未能履行职业及商业承诺而被迫对其提起多起诉讼的商业伙伴。\n\n被告对原告的诽谤\n\n23. 自 2014 年末至 2016 年，原告发表多篇有关郭的文章，指出尽管郭曾公开发表反对 PRC 的言论，其仍与 PRC 政府密切协作和/或奉该政府之命行事。\n\n24. 例如，2014 年 12 月，博讯在采访一名声称遭郭侵害的中国商人后，发表了数篇报道。\n\n25. 该受访者表示，郭利用其在 PRC 国家安全部的关系威胁他，并使郭得以非法获益。\n\n26. 郭对有关其的这些事实被公开揭露感到非常愤怒。\n\n27. 因此，郭展开了一场全面的运动，利用威胁、恐吓和诽谤来诋毁原告。\n\n28. 事实上，根据所获信息及信念，郭的行为及其诽谤孟和博讯的运动，是为了推进其自身的媒体业务。\n\n29. 郭名为“Democracy TV”的媒体项目（一项郭全球媒体集团（Guo Global Media Group）项目）的商业计划书副本，由孟从一则 Twitter 帖文（@YvetteWong0 于 09/14/2017）取得；该计划书称，2017 年，“MGM will make every step forward to sink the Boxun, while phasing out the media under Watson's [Meng's] control.”\n\n已提交：纽约县书记官 03/30/2018 02:14 PM 案号：159636/2017 NYSCEF 文件编号：6 NYSCEF 收件日期：04/13/2018 案件 22-50073 文件 478-1 提交日期 06/20/22 登记日期 06/20/22 22:20:51 第 6 页，共 25 页\n\n媒体集团项目）声称，在 2017 年，“MGM 将竭尽全力击沉博讯，同时逐步淘汰 Watson［孟］控制下的媒体。”\n\n30. 根据该项目，郭将“保持 100% 完全酌情权以控制信息传达，而郭全球媒体集团将保有播出郭内容的专有权利。”\n\n31. 如下文详述，郭多次在 Twitter 和 YouTube 上公开发表针对原告的骇人且毫无根据的主张，其唯一目的在于损害孟的职业和个人诚信，并诋毁原告的新闻独立性及诚信。\n\n32. 孟通常被博讯的读者、赞助者及批评 PRC 政府的追随者称为“魏石”。郭下文详述的每项言论均提及“魏石”，该名称直接与孟相关联。\n\nA. 郭在 Twitter 上发布的诽谤性言论\n\n33. 根据所获信息及信念，郭在 Twitter 上拥有超过 524,000 名追随者。\n\n34. 于 February 17, 2017，郭在 Twitter 上声称：“@wmeng8 魏石先生，你怎么敢睁着眼睛说瞎话，网民都知道怎么看！请不要犯这种愚蠢的错误，认为你比网民更聪明！你可以拿出我提到的证据，你说我爱钱，我是企业家，所以我为什么不爱钱，然而，我不像你那样，为了赚取不义之财而背叛朋友、利用他人的信任来欺负弱者并帮助恶人！你从关于我的伪造报道中向三方收钱，你太邪恶了，和坏的纪律委员会+公安一样邪恶！”\n\n已提交：纽约县书记官 03/30/2018 02:14 PM 案号：159636/2017 NYSCEF 文件编号：6 NYSCEF 收件日期：04/13/2018 案件 22-50073 文件 478-1 提交日期 06/20/22 登记日期 06/20/22 22:20:51 第 7 页，共 25 页\n\n35. 于 February 17, 2017，郭在 Twitter 上声称：“@ZhaoMingObserve @wmeng8 你为我伸张正义，他们欺负你，我怎么能只是看着而不做任何事，这不是郭文贵的风格。为了感谢你今天为我伸张正义，请代我披露一些有关魏石先生潜伏并收钱的证据！无论我们做什么，都必须同时做到明智和合乎情理，而且我们也要依据证据行事！”\n\n36. 于 February 22, 2017，郭在 Twitter 上声称：“亲爱的网民：我相信网民已经看过有关郭文贵‘三恶’的合成视频。经官方可靠渠道证实，该视频来源是傅政华，其直接下令播放该视频。海外的魏石和西诺直接受第一局和傅政华指挥，并获承诺给予巨大利益。除原有年度拨款外，消灭明镜和郭文贵，把海外华文媒体市场交给魏石，并向他们提供巨额资金支持。由于我没有完全听从他们的控制，并提及政治局成员和常委，特别调查组在过去 48 小时内再次来到我的公司，对相关当事人进行所谓的传讯和取证。据称，上述要求是要不惜一切代价给郭文贵及其儿子定罪。只有在他们被定罪后，才能签发国际逮捕令。”\n\n37. 第一局系指公安部，该部是 PRC 的主要警察及安全机关，并为对执法活动行使监督权的政府机构。\n\n38. 傅政华是曾任公安部副部长的 PRC 公安官员。\n\n已提交：纽约县书记官 03/30/2018 02:14 PM 案号：159636/2017 NYSCEF 文件编号：6 NYSCEF 收件日期：04/13/2018 案件 22-50073 文件 478-1 提交日期 06/20/22 登记日期 06/20/22 22:20:51 第 8 页，共 25 页\n\n39. 于 February 22, 2017，郭在 Twitter 上声称：“@ZhaoMingObserve 为了感谢网民们令我深受感动、难以言表的支持：让我爆出两条新闻，作为给你们的小小奖励[.] 照片中打了马赛克的人是北京大学前校长的哥哥，他是个很了不起的人，因为这张照片中只有李友、我以及我们游览九寨沟的照片，所以博讯一在其网站上发布这张照片，我就知道李友和其政治局常委股东收买了博讯的魏石。”\n\n40. 于 March 6, 2017，郭在 Twitter 上声称：“今天是美好的一天：我读了唐柏桥先生所写的这篇客观而优秀的文章，深受感动。这就是 Twitter 世界的力量、吸引力和温暖。文贵由衷感谢唐先生，而魏石、西诺及其老板必须被绳之以法。他们对境内外华人的威胁及邪恶势力必须被根除，而一切才刚刚开始。必须如此。”\n\n41. 2017年3月21日，Guo Wengui（郭文贵）在Twitter上声称：“@wenyunchao Wengui在此与韦石的支持者赌一次：韦石先生和西诺先生均将因敲诈勒索和逃税罪而被检察官起诉。我只是要求你们在我于纽约举行的胜利宴会上，为我的草根式诚实和勇敢喝完整整一瓶酒。如果他们能在2017年年底前逍遥法外，我将在2018年春节邀请他们参加我的宴会，喝一瓶酒，并且还将向每人支付one million U.S. Dollars作为补偿。谁愿意报名？”\n\n42. 2017年10月3日，郭文贵在Twitter上声称：“请大家小心，这是一封网络钓鱼邮件。它是假的……是韦石、B Wu和西诺干的！”\n\n43. 根据所知及确信，郭文贵还曾在Twitter上就Meng Weican（孟维灿）和Boxun（博讯）发表其他声明，该等声明此后已从郭文贵的Twitter账户中删除。\n\n44. 鉴于博讯作为正常运作的新闻服务机构取得成功的前提是其独立于PRC（中华人民共和国）政府及所有其他政府机构，称孟与中华人民共和国政府合作的虚假陈述极大损害了孟的声誉，因而当然构成诽谤。\n\n45. 此外，郭文贵关于原告据称实施犯罪的虚假陈述亦当然构成诽谤。\n\nB. 郭文贵在YouTube上的诽谤性陈述\n\n46. 郭文贵还在YouTube上发布了有关原告的陈述。\n\n47. 2017年5月19日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“他们也很有意思，他们立刻向我提供信息，说博讯的韦石非常坏。他们说他有两个弟弟，他的真名叫孟维灿，来自河北省；他有一个弟弟叫孟维松，让我看看，是的，孟维松；还有另一个弟弟叫孟维康（音译）。至少有四个我完全不认识的推友说，他们此前同他的家人有过往来，即为了（无法辨认）以及为了（无法辨认），而且他们与各个部门都有联系。”\n\n48. 2017年5月20日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“我很高兴看到韦石在看到我的电视公告后给我发了消息，这是我第一次看到韦石先生如此生气。他说，如果你针对我的家人，我不会轻易放过你。然而，我今天非常高兴，因为我终于看到我的对手因其家人而感到痛苦。我不是变态，但我很高兴，因为我找到了你的痛点。难道你的家人不会让你感到痛苦吗？我也可以向你的伙伴和叛徒学习。你不是在香港接到了新任务吗？你不是昨天对我说过‘Guo Wengui，让我们看看谁会先被关起来’吗？没错，让我们看看谁会先被关起来。接下来，至于你的弟弟和你的家人，你会看到我将如何处理他们。韦石，你看，只要你有痛点，一切都很容易。让我们看看谁会先被关起来，韦石。韦石先生，你在香港接受了你的任务，而且你有这种妄想；你和那些叛徒、流氓就像双胞胎一样，总能找到充分理由为你们的邪恶作为和行动辩解。”\n\n已提交：NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK（纽约县书记官）03/30/2018 02:14 PM 案号：159636/2017 NYSCEF文件编号：6 NYSCEF收到：04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 10 of 25\n\n49. 2017年6月13日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“还有博讯的韦石，博讯的韦石，加上最重要的是，中国境内叛徒在幕后所谓的系统性控制，这非常非常可怕。”\n\n50. 2017年6月28日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“我甚至不想再提博讯了，博讯肯定会被美国政府逮捕，让我们等着瞧，我非常急切地期待着。即便如此，仍然有人支持它；那些支持它的人应当知道你们将会落得什么下场。他们为中国政府工作；这已得到美国政府官员的一致确认。”\n\n51. 2017年7月8日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“你的两个弟弟正在北京收钱，韦石，针对你所做的一切，我一定会让你付出代价！你很快就会知道，我和你打过赌。让我们看看你在年底时会去哪里。”\n\n52. 2017年10月10日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“昨天非常奇怪，昨天早上，也就是前一天北京的晚上，Maosheng（茅生）的Jin Zhizheng（金治政）就韦石和西诺家人的信息联系了我，包括韦石的几个伙伴在中国大肆敛财。我非常震惊，我以为不是真的，随后我回家打电话核实，发现是真的。非常有意思；然后也是昨天，几名美国记者打电话向我核实，他们听说Hu Jingtao（胡锦涛）和Wen Jiabao（温家宝）被逮捕了。我问他们是否在博讯上看到的，他们说是。我告诉他们，那个网站上的每一条信息都是100%假的。这太灾难性了。你能相信博讯居然说胡锦涛和温家宝被逮捕了吗？！”\n\n已提交：纽约县书记官03/30/2018 02:14 PM 案号：159636/2017 NYSCEF文件编号：6 NYSCEF收到：04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 11 of 25\n\n53. “Jin Zhizheng”一词意为“省级经济侦查员”，其属于上文所述公安部的一个部门。\n\n54. 2017年7月17日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“因此，韦石必定会在监狱中度过余生。这是确定的，我可以负责任地这样说。无论你说什么都无关紧要，因为他们已经完成了对他的调查。”\n\n55. 2017年8月5日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“相较而言，博讯的韦石就是一堆垃圾；那个家伙能为一百美元卖掉他的母亲，那个韦石，他真的能为一百美元卖掉他的母亲；他一闻到钱就会深吸一口气，他控制不住自己，他不一样。因此，明知韦石是特工、西诺是特工，但没人采取任何行动；现在感觉好像人人都是特工。”\n\n56. 2017年8月21日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“博讯，以及韦石、西诺和Toad Li（蛤蟆李），是在美国的一个情报组织，他们还能继续欺骗吗？美国政府看不见吗？他们还能视而不见多久？！因此，如你所见，有多少间谍和特工将被Wengui（文贵）的魔镜抓住，这太有意思了。”\n\n已提交：纽约县书记官03/30/2018 02:14 PM 案号：159636/2017 NYSCEF文件编号：6 NYSCEF收到：04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 12 of 25\n\n57. 2017年8月28日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“Haemorrhoid Xia（痔疮夏）、韦石、西诺，他们公然进行网络钓鱼并收钱，他们违法犯罪，为什么不引用这个？”\n\n58. 2017年9月4日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“那么韦石、西诺都是犯罪分子和通缉犯！”\n\n59. 2017年9月6日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“逃离了Toad Li Weidong（蛤蟆李卫东）的野猪群和野狗群，以及西诺、韦石、Xia Yeliang（夏业良）的Haemorrhoid Xia，还有像Sun Lijun（孙立军）和Meng Jianzhu（孟建柱）这样的叛徒。”\n\n60. 2017年9月10日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“因此，Li Weidong（李卫东）、蛤蟆李，以及诸如韦石和西诺之人，还有Haemorrhoid Zhang（痔疮张）和痔疮夏，都是‘Lan-Jin-Huang [Blue/Gold/Yellow]（蓝金黄）’的结果。”\n\n61. “Operation Blue/Gold/Yellow（蓝金黄行动）”是郭文贵用以描述中华人民共和国策略的术语，即通过贿赂、敲诈勒索和其他不正当手段锁定个人，并胁迫其为中华人民共和国政府工作的策略。\n\n62. 2017年9月10日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“就像痔疮夏、痔疮张、韦石、西诺、蛤蟆李卫东，以及这个He Qinlian（何清涟），还有一堆这些东西，所有这些都会像飞灰一样被抹去。让这些人给我们一份大礼；他们会让我们看到，这些沉默的力量正在威胁我们对民主和法律制度的追求。”\n\n63. 2017年9月19日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“在下游，有博讯的韦石和西诺，还有蛤蟆李卫东，他们利用一个公开的Tweeter账户和一个虚假的Wang Yanping（王燕平）身份在外部活动，并有许多黑客攻击你和Mingjing（明镜）的所有人。”\n\n已提交：纽约县书记官03/30/2018 02:14 PM 案号：159636/2017 NYSCEF文件编号：6 NYSCEF收到：04/13/2018 Case 22-50073 Doc 478-1 Filed 06/20/22 Entered 06/20/22 22:20:51 Page 13 of 25\n\n64. 2018年2月4日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“我能去博讯吗？我当然不能去博讯，否则我一去博讯就会被抓，我迟早会在不知情的情况下死去。”\n\n65. 郭文贵在该YouTube视频后段继续称：“Chen Jun（陈军），你现在需要回答以下问题：你与韦石是什么关系？你与西诺是什么关系，你与Yuan Jianbin（袁建斌）又是什么关系？你是否曾与他们合谋陷害Guo Wengui？……当我们回顾时，你所说的一切都是由袁建斌、韦石、Wu Zheng（吴征）和共产党散布的谣言。”\n\n66. 郭文贵在该2018年2月4日视频中进一步称，再次提及陈军时称：“然而，如果他不说实话，而是像博讯、韦石、Li Weidong（李卫东）或Ye Liang（叶良）等人那样行事，那么我们就只能等着瞧……”\n\n67. 2018年2月10日，郭文贵在一段YouTube视频中称：“每个人都能看出陈军、袁建斌、韦石、西诺、吴征有一个共同点：他们可以面不改色地撒谎。他们认为这个世界上的其他人都没有脑子；正是因为他们每次都能靠谎言逃脱，这就是他们能如此无知和傲慢的原因……袁建斌、韦石、西诺和陈军骗了谁的钱？是他们朋友的钱；而吴征骗取政府的钱，Jack Ma（马云）从政府那里偷钱。”\n\n68. 鉴于原告作为正常运作的新闻服务机构取得成功的前提是其独立于中华人民共和国政府及所有其他政府机构，这些指控极大损害了原告的职业声誉，因而当然构成诽谤。\n\nC. 郭文贵的其他骚扰和恐吓行为\n\n69. 除郭文贵针对原告作出的极为公开的诽谤性陈述外，郭文贵还针对孟本人实施了蓄意的骚扰和恐吓活动，意图使其遭受精神痛苦，并进一步破坏原告的业务努力。\n\n70. 如本文所述，郭文贵通过其代理人实施的极端且令人发指的行为，已使孟遭受严重精神痛苦。\n\n71. 2017年3月3日，郭文贵派遣三名男子前往纽约州法拉盛一名博讯员工的住所。\n\n72. 当日约下午6:40，该三名男子敲响了该博讯员工住所的门。\n\n73. 该员工的女房东应门，但拒绝开门。\n\n74. 作为回应，该三名男子踢门。\n\n75. 该员工的女房东威胁要报警，三名男子随即离开。\n\n76. 该事件使该员工的女房东感到痛苦并身体不适。\n\n77. 同日晚上9:40，孟的监控摄像头记录到一辆曾到其住所的黑色汽车。\n\n78. 对孟所在社区而言，尤其是在傍晚这个时段，该黑色汽车到访其住所并不寻常。\n\n79. 次日，即 March 4, 2017，Guo（郭文贵）在 Twitter（推特）上承认，Meng（孟维世）及其员工所遭受的骚扰系由 Guo 指使：“早上好，Weishi（维世）先生：你原本试图通过设法联系检察官或 FBI 来吓唬我，然后你又想提起诉讼……就连蒙古一半的牛都被你……和你的行为吓死了？Wengui 已不能再等，因为我已准备采取行动……昨天我的兄弟们没把你吓得尿裤子，是吗？这些检察官和警察将陪你进监狱，你最好联系你在北京的组织寻求帮助！Weishi 先生！一切才刚刚开始！”\n\n已提交：NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK（纽约县书记官）03/30/2018 02:14 PM 索引号 159636/2017 NYSCEF 文件编号 6 NYSCEF 收悉：04/13/2018 案件 22-50073 文件 478-1 提交 06/20/22 录入 06/20/22 22:20:51 第 15 页，共 25 页\n\n80. 随同该声明，Guo 发布了四张照片，照片中数名男子站在一辆警车前。\n\n81. 根据所知及确信，照片中所示男子为警察，或者与执法部门有关联。\n\n82. 当日稍后，Guo 在 Twitter 上向孟提出挑战：“Weishi 先生从鼠洞里爬出来了。当（我）来的时候，（你）不是被吓死了吗？你给我的地址是假的，你昨天吓得躲起来了。你连接受起诉书和调查通知的胆量都没有，却还在这里胡说八道，现在又开始提我的护照。要是你有胆量，我们就把护照带到明镜的直播中。或者今天你想在哪里见我都可以！你敢吗？出来走两步？”\n\n83. 孟希望结束 Guo 对其实施的骚扰和恐吓手段，因此接受了 Guo 当面会面的提议。\n\n84. 于 March 4, 2017 约 4 p.m.，孟在 New York（纽约）Flushing（法拉盛）的 Sheraton Hotel（喜来登酒店）与 Guo 会面。\n\n85. Guo 由十余名看似保镖的人员、一名律师及助理陪同。\n\n86. 在会面中，孟告诉 Guo 及其代理人，他们本不应派人前往 Boxun（博讯）员工的住处，也不应踢该员工的门。\n\n87. 对此，Guo 告诉孟，他派往博讯员工住处的男子是警察（暗示其雇用这些警察为其办事），并称他们“可以去任何人的家。”\n\n88. Guo 表示，当该员工的女房东拒绝开门时，他指示那些男子踢门。\n\n89. 根据所知及确信，Guo 再次命令其代理人于凌晨和深夜骚扰孟，其中部分或全部代理人携带枪支。\n\n90. 孟的监控摄像头拍到 Guo 的代理人多次返回孟的住处。\n\n91. 于 March 6, 2017，Guo 的代理人跟踪孟至原告方办公室附近的一家甜甜圈店。\n\n92. 在该事件中，Guo 的代理人拍摄了孟及孟的车辆照片，该等照片被发布在 Twitter 上（@YvetteWong0 于 8/18/2017）。\n\n93. 于 March 7, 2017，Guo 的代理人从孟的住处一路跟踪孟超过四十英里，直至博讯办公室。孟向警方报告了该事件。\n\n94. 同日约 10:30 p.m.，孟发现一名身份不明者坐在一辆白色汽车内监视孟的住处。\n\n95. 出于对自身安全的担忧，孟报警。\n\n96. 经调查后，警方表示，其住处外的该名人员受雇监视孟的住处。\n\n97. 次日，即 March 8, 2017 上午，孟发现原先停在其住处外的白色轿车已被一辆厢式货车替代，车内一名人员亦在监视孟的住处。\n\n98. 当孟拍摄其住处前的该辆厢式货车时，该车迅速驶离。该车后来又返回同一地点。\n\n99. 根据所知及确信，Guo 雇用这些人员监视孟的住处，以推进其骚扰和恐吓行动。\n\n100. 于 May 8, 2017，孟得知 Guo 的代理人取得了孟的机密个人及商业银行信息，包括其银行交易记录。\n\n101. Guo 在 Twitter 和 YouTube（优兔）上公布了孟的银行账户信息。\n\n102. 最近，Guo 还试图招募第三方参与其对孟的攻击。\n\n103. 具体而言，于 October 2017 的多次场合，Guo 指示其代理人和／或代表，包括但不限于名为 Guo Baosheng（郭宝胜）的人，亲自接触并以言语与孟的朋友、同事及商业伙伴沟通，包括但不限于名为 Yuan Jianbin（袁建斌）的人。\n\n104. Guo 的代理人和代表向孟的朋友、同事及商业伙伴提供金钱及其他诱因，促使其与孟疏远，并公开发表有关孟的负面言论，从而进一步诽谤孟。\n\n105. 由于孟的朋友、同事及商业伙伴对孟表现出的忠诚，其中一些努力未获成功。\n\n106. 然而，在其他情形中，这些努力获得成功，包括但不限于 Zhao Yan（赵岩）、Ge Lifang（葛丽芳）和 Ai Furong（艾芙蓉）；三人均应 Guo 要求，公开发表有关孟和博讯的负面言论，从而背叛孟和博讯。\n\n107. Guo 的身体及精神恐吓行为，以及其在本文中详述的诽谤性陈述，已给孟造成严重精神痛苦。\n\n108. Guo 对孟个人及职业关系的干扰，导致并进一步加剧了孟的精神痛苦。\n\n第一项诉因（当然诽谤）\n\n109. 原告方通过援引将前述及后续各段全部并入本文，如同在本文中完整详尽列明。\n\n110. 通过前述社交媒体账户、网站及各种其他书面材料上的发布，Guo 曾虚假且反复地声称，除其他事项外，孟是 PRC（中华人民共和国）政府的受薪代理人，或以其他方式受该国政府和／或情报机构控制，并称孟实施了犯罪行为。\n\n111. 无数人已阅读该等陈述。\n\n112. 这些反复作出的虚假陈述损害了孟的声誉，并使许多人怀疑孟作为记者的独立性。\n\n113. 这些陈述已在大量人群中损害了孟的声誉，并导致他们将原告方与不良新闻报道、虚假报道及存在利益冲突的动机联系起来。\n\n114. Guo 明知这些陈述虚假，或者至少是在罔顾其真实性的情况下作出这些陈述。\n\n115. Guo 无权作出这些虚假陈述，该等陈述亦不受任何特权保护。\n\n116. Guo 作出这些陈述，意在损害孟、孟的声誉及其业务，并诱使第三方不与孟进行业务往来，尤其是停止消费博讯提供的独立新闻报道。\n\n117. 孟因被告作出的这些虚假陈述而直接遭受广泛损害，并将因该等违法行为继续遭受不可弥补的损害；对此不存在充分的法律救济。\n\n第二项诉因（诽谤）\n\n118. 原告方通过援引将前述及后续各段全部并入本文，如同在本文中完整详尽列明。\n\n119. 通过社交媒体账户、网站及各种其他书面材料，Guo 曾虚假且反复地声称，孟是中华人民共和国政府的受薪代理人，或以其他方式受该国情报机构控制，并称孟实施了犯罪行为。\n\n120. 无数人已阅读这些书面陈述。\n\n121. Guo 明知这些陈述虚假，或者至少是在罔顾其真实性的情况下作出这些陈述。\n\n122. Guo 既无授权亦无特权作出该等陈述。Guo 作出这些陈述，意在损害孟、孟的声誉及其业务，并诱使其他方不与孟进行业务往来。\n\n123. 孟因这些虚假陈述而直接遭受如上所述的广泛损害，包括但不限于极度精神痛苦及其个人和职业声誉受损，并将因该等违法行为继续遭受不可弥补的损害；对此不存在充分的法律救济。\n\n124. 通过社交媒体、网站及各种其他书面材料，Guo 曾虚假且反复地声称，博讯是中华人民共和国政府的受薪代理人，并称其实施了犯罪行为。\n\n已提交：纽约县书记官 03/30/2018 02:14 PM 索引号 159636/2017 NYSCEF 文件编号 6 NYSCEF 收悉：04/13/2018 案件 22-50073 文件 478-1 提交 06/20/22 录入 06/20/22 22:20:51 第 20 页，共 25 页\n\n125. 无数人已阅读这些书面陈述。\n\n126. Guo 明知这些陈述虚假，或者至少是在罔顾其真实性的情况下作出这些陈述。Guo 既无授权亦无特权作出该等陈述。Guo 作出这些陈述，意在损害博讯、其声誉及其业务，并诱使其他方不与其进行业务往来。\n\n127. 博讯因这些虚假陈述而直接遭受如上所述的广泛损害，包括但不限于收入损失及其职业声誉受损，并将因该等违法行为继续遭受不可弥补的损害；对此不存在充分的法律救济。\n\n第三项诉因（商业诽谤／有害虚假陈述）\n\n128. 原告方通过援引将前述及后续各段全部并入本文，如同在本文中完整详尽列明。\n\n129. 通过社交媒体账户、网站及视频陈述，Guo 曾虚假且反复地声称，孟是中华人民共和国政府的受薪代理人，或以其他方式受该国情报机构控制，并称孟实施了犯罪行为。\n\n130. Guo 明知这些陈述虚假，或者至少是在罔顾其真实性的情况下作出这些陈述。Guo 既无授权亦无特权作出该等陈述。Guo 作出这些陈述，意在损害孟、孟的声誉及其业务，并诱使其他方不与孟进行业务往来。\n\n131. 这些虚假陈述已使无数读者质疑孟及其在博讯所从事工作的诚信和真实性。\n\n132. 此外，这些虚假陈述已诱使其他方不与孟进行业务往来。\n\n已提交：纽约县书记官 03/30/2018 02:14 PM 索引号 159636/2017 NYSCEF 文件编号 6 NYSCEF 收悉：04/13/2018 案件 22-50073 文件 478-1 提交 06/20/22 录入 06/20/22 22:20:51 第 21 页，共 25 页\n\n133. 孟因这些虚假陈述而直接遭受广泛损害，并将因该等违法行为继续遭受不可弥补的损害；对此不存在充分的法律救济。\n\n134. 通过社交媒体账户及视频陈述，Guo 曾虚假地声称，博讯是中华人民共和国政府的受薪代理人，并称其实施了犯罪行为。\n\n135. 无数人已阅读和听到这些陈述。\n\n136. Guo 明知这些陈述虚假，或者至少是在罔顾其真实性的情况下作出这些陈述。Guo 既无授权亦无特权作出该等陈述。Guo 作出这些陈述，意在损害博讯、其声誉及其业务，并诱使其他方不与其进行业务往来。\n\n137. 这些虚假陈述已诱使无数人不再订阅博讯作为新闻来源。\n\n138. 此外，这些虚假言论已损害博讯与潜在商业伙伴之间的业务关系，使其质疑该公司的合法性，甚至终止其与博讯的关系。\n\n139. Boxun（博讯）因这些虚假陈述而直接遭受了重大损害，并将因该等违法行为继续遭受无法弥补的损害，且法律上不存在充分的救济。\n\n第四项诉因（故意造成精神痛苦）\n\n140. 原告将前述及后述各段援引并入本项，如同在此完整详述。\n\n141. 通过前述社交媒体账户、视频陈述及书面材料，Guo（郭文贵）虚假且反复地声称，Meng（孟维灿）是中华人民共和国政府的受薪代理人，或者受该国情报机构控制，并称其实施了犯罪行为。\n\n142. 无数个人已阅读、观看并听闻了这些陈述。\n\n143. Guo明知这些陈述为虚假，或者至少在毫不顾及其真实性的情况下作出了这些陈述。他反复发布有关Meng的这些虚假指控，构成极端且骇人的行为。\n\n144. 此外，Guo实施了故意行为，以骚扰和恐吓Meng，包括派遣其代理人跟踪Meng；监视其住所；以及调查Meng的个人及商业银行交易。Guo针对Meng开展的骚扰和恐吓活动构成极端且骇人的行为。\n\n145. 此外，Guo聘请并支付上述第三方，以便其：（1）向Meng的朋友及同事就原告作出虚假陈述；（2）以身体威胁恐吓Meng；以及（3）接近Meng雇员的住所，并试图恐吓该人。\n\n146. Guo作出这些陈述，并通过其代表实施恐吓行为，意图使Meng遭受严重精神痛苦；或者至少，他在毫不顾及这些陈述及行为极有可能使Meng遭受严重精神痛苦的情况下，通过其代表作出这些陈述并实施恐吓行为。\n\n147. 由于这些虚假且骇人的陈述及故意行为，Meng直接遭受了至少如下损害：严重精神痛苦、羞耻、焦虑、情感痛苦、痛苦、不便、精神折磨、丧失生活乐趣及其他非金钱损失。\n\n148. 因此，Meng遭受的损害金额应由审判确定。\n\nNYSCEF 文件编号 6，NYSCEF 收件日期：04/13/2018　案件 22-50073，文件 478-1，提交日期 06/20/22，录入日期 06/20/22 22:20:51，第 23 页，共 25 页\n\n第五项诉因（合谋故意造成精神痛苦）\n\n提交：NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK（纽约县书记官）03/30/2018 02:14 PM　案号 159636/2017\n\n149. 原告将前述及后述各段援引并入本项，如同在此完整详述。\n\n150. 如上文所述，Guo实施了一项骚扰、恐吓及诽谤原告的计划，从而使Meng遭受严重精神痛苦。\n\n151. Guo与第三方合谋，以促成并实施其不法计划。\n\n152. 例如，Guo聘请并支付上述第三方，以便其：（1）向Meng的朋友及同事就原告作出虚假陈述；（2）跟踪Meng上班；（3）监视并以身体威胁恐吓Meng；以及（4）接近Meng雇员的住所，并试图恐吓该人。\n\n153. Guo通过指示这些第三方实施该等行为，并向其支付报酬，为推进该合谋实施了公开行为。\n\n154. 由于该合谋及该等行为，Meng遭受了如上文所述的严重精神痛苦、羞耻、焦虑、情感痛苦、痛苦、不便、精神折磨、丧失生活乐趣及其他非金钱损失。\n\n155. 因此，Meng遭受的损害金额应由审判确定。\n\n因此，原告请求法院作出有利于原告且不利于被告的判决如下：\n\n（i）由审判确定数额、但不少于 $1 million 的补偿性损害赔偿及惩罚性损害赔偿；\n\n（ii）禁止被告以及任何代表其行事或声称代表其行事之人作出本文件所列任何虚假及诽谤性陈述，或涉及原告的类似虚假及诽谤性陈述；\n\n（iii）惩罚性损害赔偿；\n\n（iv）本案所产生的费用及开支，包括律师费；以及\n\n（v）法院认为公正且适当的其他及进一步救济。\n\n日期：March 30, 2018\n\nARKIN SOLBAKKEN LLP\n\n原告代理律师　签字：\n\nLisa C. Solbakken, Esq.\nRobert C. Angelillo, Esq.\n750 Lexington Avenue, 25th Floor\nNew York, New York 10022\n电话：(212) 333-0200\n传真：(212)333-2350\n\n提交：NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK（纽约县书记官）03/30/2018 02:14 PM　案号 159636/2017　NYSCEF 文件编号 6，NYSCEF 收件日期：04/13/2018　案件 22-50073，文件 478-1，提交日期 06/20/22，录入日期 06/20/22 22:20:51，第 25 页，共 25 页\n\n核验\n\n纽约州\n纽约县　：兹证明\n\n“Watson” Weican “Watson” Meng（孟维灿）经依法宣誓后，陈述如下：\n\n我是本案的个人原告。我已阅读前述起诉状，并知悉其内容。该起诉状内容均据本人所知属实，但其中基于信息和信念提出的事项除外；对于该等事项，我相信其为真实。\n\n“Watson” Weican “Watson” Meng\n\n于 2018 年 March 的第 30 日在本人面前宣誓\n\nJOSEPH J. CLAYTON\n纽约州公证人\n编号 01CL6252511\n具备 Suffolk County（萨福克县）执业资格\n任期届满日期：12/05/2019","key_entities":["Guo","Kwok","Je","CIPA","Wang Yanping"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":6680,"status":"published","published_at":"2022-06-20 00:00:00","created_at":"2022-06-20","updated_at":"2026-08-23 19:41:41"}