James Lawrence v. Altice USA

QUESTIONS AND ARGUMENTS ABOUT ALTICE/NEWS 12 CONNECTICUT REPORTING “Arrested, for Stalking Several Women ’ and “Preying on Women” as NOT being as Second Circuit Court of Appeals concludes “substantially true”. NOTE: Color coding used so to be consistent with how written in past Briefs. QUESTION #1: Can a media lawfully portray a ONE TIME One Count of Second Degree Breach of Peace arrest as “ARRESTED FOR STALKING SEVERAL WOMEN” given the fact that the stalk or harass wording (Course of Conduct Behaviors and actual laws)) are not part of the Second Degree Breach of Peace Statute? QUESTION #2: Can a media lawfully portray a ONE TIME One Count of Second Degree Breach of Peace arrest as “ARRESTED FOR STALKING SEVERAL WOMEN” given the fact that the stalk or harass terminology/words are NOT DEPLOYED BY THE ARREST WARRANT WRITING OFFICER? QUESTION #3: Can a media lawfully portray a ONE TIME One Count of Second Degree Breach of Peace arrest as “ARRESTED FOR STALKING SEVERAL WOMEN” given the fact that no woman/women was/were ever quoted or willing to give a Sworn Written Statement let alone deploy the stalk or harass terminology in a complaint? QUESTION #4: If a media company are to choose different words (let alone laws) than the Arrest Warrant, should a media company not be obligated to have names and/or actual quotes from alleged victim/s when deploying a subjective interpretation of an Arrest Warrant that never uses the words stalking or harassing? QUESTION #5: Why is the Second Circuit Court of Appeal NOT writing “ALLEGED totality of Lawrence’s conduct” given the fact the reader of the Arrest Warrant KNOWS that these past alleged one-time acts of as police wrote “get into personal space” are theories, unproven, and unprovable because there are no arrests (Probable Cause) tied to these incidents let alone evidence for veritable stalking behavior? QUESTION #6: Does the Second Circuit Court accurately define the dictionary definition of stalking, stealth, and harass? QUESTION #7: