# Lucy Criag's Lolwyer Doxxes His Own Client

First he doxxes an active U.S. Marine Corp Servicemember, now his own client

Lucy Craig's Plaintiff Affirmation The publication of this document, in its entirety and without editorial or additional censorship, serves the fundamental public interest in transparency, judicial accountability, and the free exchange of information concerning matters before the courts. This document was obtained directly from the court's publicly accessible docket, where it was made available for public inspection. The First Amendment strongly protects the accurate publication of information lawfully obtained from official judicial records. In Cox Broadcasting Corp.
[Lucy Craig's Plaintiff Affirmation](https://lucycraig.blog/media/324)

The publication of this document, in its entirety and without editorial or additional censorship, serves the fundamental public interest in transparency, judicial accountability, and the free exchange of information concerning matters before the courts.

This document was obtained directly from the court's publicly accessible docket, where it was made available for public inspection.

The First Amendment strongly protects the accurate publication of information lawfully obtained from official judicial records. In Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn, 420 U.S. 469 (1975), the United States Supreme Court recognized that the public and press have a constitutionally protected interest in reporting truthful information contained in public court records.

Selective redaction or editorial manipulation of an otherwise public document risks distorting the judicial record and depriving readers of the opportunity to independently evaluate the evidence, arguments, and conduct of the parties.

Accordingly, absent an applicable sealing order, legally required redaction, or other enforceable restriction, we publish the document exactly as made publicly available by the court, on their website, as published by Lucy Craig's lolwyer, without alteration, endorsement, or additional censorship.

Public court records belong in the public discourse, not behind the editorial preferences of those who would rather the public not read them. In this case, given that Craig's attorney has significantly increased his use of censorship of the signature block this time, and has significantly used the redaction tools, we can only deduce that he WANTED the home apartment address of Lucy Craig to be shared.

[Train wreak Lucy Criag](https://lucycraig.blog/media/315)